w 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


S/ie// 


BX    8065     .D5    1893 

The  distinctive  doctrines 
and  usages  of  the  general 


it-> 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Arcinive 

in  2009  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/distinctivedoctrOOphil 


THE 


DISTINCTIVE  DOCTRINES  AND  USAGES 


OF  THE 


GENERAL  BODIES 


OF  THE 


EVANGELICAL  LUTHERAN  CHURCH 


IN  THE 


UNITED  STATES. 


PHILADELPHIA,  PA.: 

LUTHERAN  rUBLICATION  SOCIETY. 


Copyright,  1893, 

BY 

THE  LUTHERAN  PUBLICATION  SOCIETY. 


INTRODUCTION. 

THE  Iviitheran  Board  of  Publication  issues  this 
Book  in  response  to  the  suggestion  of  one  of 
its  lay  members.  A  brief  yet  comprehensive  state- 
ment of  the  distinctive  doctrines  and  usages  of  the 
General  Bodies  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  in  this  country,  it  was  thought,  would 
furnish  information  that  would  be  desired  by  many, 
but  which  was  not  accessible  in  a  cheap  and  con- 
venient form.  These  distinctive  features  are  here 
presented  by  the  able  and  eminent  wTiters  who 
represent  their  respective  General  Bodies.  Each 
writer  views  these  differences  from  his  own  doc- 
trinal standpoint,  and  is  alone  responsible  for  his 
statements.  The  reader,  however,  will  find  valu- 
able information  concerning  the  history  of  the  sev- 
eral General  Lutheran  Bodies,  and  the  causes 
which  have  originated  and  which  yet  perpetuate 
their  organic  separation. 

The  several   papers  are  arranged   in  the  order  of 
the  date  of  the  organization  of  each  General  Body. 

1.  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio,  organized  1818. 

2.  General  Synod,  organized  1820. 

3.  German  Iowa  Synod,  organized  1854. 

4.  General  Council,  organized  1867. 

5.  Synodical  Conference,  organized  1872. 

6.  United  Synod  in  the  South,  organized  1886. 

(iii) 


CONTENTS. 


PACB 

1.  The  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio— 

By  Rev.  Prof.  M.  Loy,  D.  D 5 

2.  Thk  Generai.  Synod — 

By  Rev.  Prof.  M.  Valentine,  D.  D.,  LL.D 34 

3.  The  German  Iowa  Synod— 

By  Rev.  Prof.  S.  Fritschel,  D.  D 62 

4.  The  Generai.  Councii.— 

By  Rev.  Prof.  H.  B-  Jacobs,  D.  D.,  IvL.D 87 

5.  The  Synodicai,  Conference— 

By  Rev.  Prof.  F.  Pieper 119 

6.  The  United  Synod  in'  the  South— 

By  Rev.  E.  T.  Horn,  D.  D 167 

(iv) 


THE  JOINT  SYNOD  OF  OHIO. 

BY 

REV.  PROF.  M.  LOY    D.  D. 


IN  the  early  years  of  the  present  century  a  few 
self-denying  I^utheran  ministers,  imbued  with 
the  true  missionary  spirit,  crossed  the  Allegheny 
mountains  to  break  the  breadof  life  to  their  breth- 
ren scattered  in  the  Western  wilds.  Feeling  the 
need  of  miitual  counsel  and  encouragement,  the 
little  company  in  1812  formed  a  special  Conference, 
which  subsequently  developed  into  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Synod  of  Ohio  and  Adjacent  States. 
The  members  encountered  many  difficulties,  but 
by  the  blessing  of  God  upon  their  zealous  labors 
their  numbers  increased  and  their  work  prospered. 
In  course  of  time  it  was  deemed  necessary  to  divide 
the  Synod  into  districts,  of  which  there  are  now 
ten.  These  hold  meetings  annually,  while  every 
two  years  they  all  meet  in  joint  convention.  The 
whole  body  is  usually  called  the  Joint  Synod  of 
Ohio. 

From  the  beginning,  the  pastors  and  congrega- 
tions thus  united  were  intent  on  preserving  and 
propagating  the  pure  Lutheran  faith,  as  with  their 

(5) 


0  DISTINCTIVE  DOCTRINES  AND   USAGES 

limited  opportunities  they  were  able  to  apprehend 
and  maintain  it,  and  many  were  their  conflicts 
with  men  who  endeavored  to  lead  their  people 
astray  by  teacliing  otherwise  than  God's  word 
teaches.  The  Confessions  of  the  Church  were  held 
in  high  esteem,  and  appeals  to  them  were  frequent, 
although  it  was  not  until  1847  that  the  symbolical 
books  were  formally  declared  to  be  the  confessional 
basis  of  Synod,  and  all  candidates  for  the  ministry 
were  required  to  subscribe  to  them.  This  position 
has  been  firmly  maintained  until  the  present  hour, 
and  in  this  all  that  is  distinctive  of  the  Joint  Synod 
of  Ohio  and  Other  States  has  its  root  and  its  ex- 
])Ianation.  In  pursuance  of  her  settled  purpose  by 
the  grace  of  her  Lord  to  be  found  faithful  to  the 
pure  gospel  as  He  mercifully  restored  it  to  His 
people  in  the  glorious  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  she  will  not  be  enticed  or  goaded  into  any 
position  or  movement  by  which  the  saving  truth 
set  forth  in  the  Confessions  of  the  Evangelical  Lu- 
theran Church  is  compromised. 

In  taking  this  ground  it  never  entered  the  minds 
of  our  pastors  or  people  to  place  the  Confessions  of 
the  Church  on  an  equality  with  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures. These  are  the  very  word  of  God  in  matter 
and  in  form.  "All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspira- 
tion of  God,  and  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  re- 
proof, for  correction,  for  instruction  in  righteous- 
ness, that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  thor- 
oughly furnished  unto  all  good  works."     2  Tim. 


OF   THB:  joint  synod   of   OHIO.  7 

iii.  i6,  17.  In  the  Scriptures  the  sovereign  Lord 
of  all  has  revealed  His  righteous  and  His  gracious 
will  in  His  own'  words.  They  are  the  only  source 
of  our  knowledge  of  saving  truth,  and  the  only 
ultimate  rule  of  faith  and  life.  Their  decision  is 
final,  and  from  them  no  appeal  can  be  allowed. 
The  symbols  occupy  a  different  place  and  serve  a 
different  purpose.  They  are  not  inspired  writings. 
They  set  forth  the  faith  which  men  have  derived 
from  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  the  infallible  source 
of  saving  truth.  The  Lutheran  Church  believes 
and  therefore  speaks.  A  doctrine  does  not  become 
divine  by  her  act  of  confessing  it,  and  no  one  is 
bound  to  believe  it  because  she  confesses  it.  She 
confesses  it  because  on  the  authority  of  God's  word 
she  believes  it,  and  she  asks  others  to  believe  it, 
and  then  with  her  to  confess  it,  because  the  Scrip- 
tures teach  it.  We  have  the  rule  "that  the  word 
of  God  should  frame  articles  of  faith,  otherwise  no 
one,  not  even  an  angel."  (Smalc.  Art.^  II.,  2,  15.) 
From  that  rule  we  can  under  no  circumstances  de- 
part, because  under  no  circumstances  could  we 
consent  to  the  subject's  usurpation  of  authority 
which  belongs  only  to  the  Sovereign.  Such  usur- 
pation is  a  mark  of  the  Antichrist,  whose  abomina- 
tions the  Reformation  has  taught  us  to  shun  as  an 
offense  against  God  and  man.  Our  Confessions 
claim  no  authority  over  the  souls  of  men,  but 
simply  declare  the  faith  which  lives  in  our  souls 
and  which  clings  to  the  word   of  the  living  God. 


S  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

"He  is  the  Lord;  that  is  His  name;  and  His 
glory  will  He  not  give  to  another."  But  when  He 
speaks  His  people  hear;  and  when  they  hear  the 
good  tidings  which  are  for  all  people,  how  can  they 
otherwise  than  publish  them  and  bear  witness  to 
them  for  the  glory  of  their  Saviour  and  the  good 
of  their  fellows-men?  Those  who  have  not  the 
faith  which  the  Lutheran  Church  confesses  are  not 
expected  to  confess  it;  but  she  believes,  and  there- 
fore speaks. 

In  the  nature  of  things  this  could  not  be  without 
effect  in  her  church  life  and  practice.  By  the  grace 
of  God  the  Christians  united  in  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  have  known  and  believed  the 
Evangelical  truth  which  is  set  forth  in  their  con- 
fession ;  and  on  that  basis  her  congregations  are  or- 
ganized, her  ministry  is  called,  and  her  discipline 
is  administered.  It  is  this  faith  that  gives  her  the 
distinctive  character  by  which  she  is  known  as  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church.  If  some  are  not 
prepared  to  accept  her  confessions  and  enter  into 
fellowship  with  her  on  these  terms,  they  are  mani- 
festly not  prepared  to  enter  into  fellowship  with 
her  at  all.  From  the  beo-inning;  she  recoonized  no 
other  terms,  and  could  recognize  no  other  without 
abandoning  her  faith  and,  with  it,  her  life  as  the 
Evangelical  Church  of  the  Reformation.  She 
came  into  being  as  a  visible  organization  by  con- 
fessing the  truth  of  the  Gospel  which  God  in 
mercy  restored  to  His  people  through  the  instru- 


OF   THE  JOINT  SYNOD   OF  OHIO.  9 

mentality  of  His  choseu  servant,  and  she  continues 
in  being  by  maintaining  that  blessed  truth  as  the 
basis  upon  which  her  membership  stands  united. 
The  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio  recognizes  the  fact  that 
the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  had  her  settled 
faith  and  her  distinctive  character  when  she  wit- 
nessed her  good  confession  at  Augsburg  in  1530, 
as  she  had  declared  it  before  in  the  universally  ac- 
cepted catechisms  prepared  by  Dr.  Luther.  Those 
who  sincerely  adopt  these  confessions  as  the  ex- 
pression of  their  faith  are  in  accord  with  her.  Of 
pastors  and  teachers  it  is  required  indeed  that  they 
accept  the  entire  Concordia  of  1580.  But  this  is 
only  because  a  more  thorough  and  a  more  exten- 
sive knowledge  of  revealed  truth  is  expected  of 
those  who  are  called  to  teach  it,  not  because  agree- 
ment in  the  faith  as  set  forth  in  the  Catechism  and 
the  Augustana  is  insufficient  for  the  unity  of  the 
Church.  What  we  are  concerned  about  is  the  faith 
once  delivered  to  the  saints,  which  we  are  in  con- 
science bound  to  hold  fast  and  perpetuate,  and 
w^hich  is  the  same  in  all  our  symbols.  Our  con- 
troversy with  those  who  reject  a  portion  of  them 
has  its  ground  in  the  conviction  that  such  rejec- 
tion betrays  a  dissent  from  the  Evangelical  doc- 
trine set  forth  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  whose 
true  import  and  meaning  the  later  symbols  develop 
and  defend. 

"Unto  the  true  unity  of  the  Church  it  is  suffi- 
cient to  agree  concerning  the  doctrines  of  the  Gos- 


JO         DISTINCTIVE  DOCTRINES  AND  USAGES 

pel  and  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments.  Nor 
is  it  necessary  that  human  traditions,  rites,  or  cer- 
emonies instituted  by  men  should  be  alike  every- 
where: as  St.  Paul  says,  '  One  faith,  one  baptism, 
one  God  and  Father  of  all.'  Eph  iv.  5,  6."  {Augs- 
burg Confession^  Art.  VII.).  That  is  the  principle 
to  which  the  Joint  Synod  is  pledged,  and  by  which 
her  practice  is  governed.  She  loves  the  old  ways 
of  our  fathers,  and  the  beautiful  forms  in  which 
they  worshiped  the  Ivord.  She  recognizes  the 
benefits  of  uniformity  in  the  ceremonies  and 
usages  of  the  churches,  and  heartily  seeks  to  pro- 
mote it.  She  desires,  even  in  externals,  to  walk 
in  the  old  paths  and  manifest  her  historical  con- 
nection with  the  old  Church.  But  she  never  fails 
to  distinguish  between  that  which  is  necessary  and 
that  which  is  free.  What  the  Lord  has  not  re- 
quired, the  servant  of  the  Lord  has  no  right  to 
require  as  a  condition  of  membership  in  His 
Church.  He  alone  is  Master,  all  we  are  brethren, 
who  have  no  authority  to  impose  and  no  obliga- 
tion to  bear  any  yoke  of  bondage.  Diversity  in 
matters  merely  human  does  not  interfere  with  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  because  the  Lord  Himself 
has  given  His  people  liberty  to  arrange  them  as  in 
the  varying  circumstances  of  congregations  they 
think  best.  Ceremonies  instituted  by  men  form 
no  part  of  the  service  of  God,  and  can  never  be  of 
divine  obligation.  "We  believe,  teach  and  confess 
that  the  Church  of  God  of  every  place  and  eveiy 


OF   THE  JOINT   SYNOD   OF   OHIO.  II 

time  has  the  power,  accordino^  to  its  circumstances, 
to  change  such  ceremonies  in  such  manner  as  may 
be  most  useful  and  edifying  to  the  Church  of  God; 
nevertheless,  that  herein  all  inconsiderateness  and 
offense  should  be  avoided,  and  especial  care  should 
be  taken  to  exercise  forbearance  to  the  weak  in 
faith:  i  Cor.  viii.  9;  Rom.  xiv.  13."  {Form. 
Cone.  Part  1.  ch.  x.  4,  5.)  Human  ordinances 
are  not  divine  laws.  But  when  the  Lord  speaks 
all  alike  must  bow  to  His  authority.  What  He 
requires  is  necessary.  From  His  Word  there  can 
be  no  appeal  to  human  thoughts  of  expediency  and 
human  tastes  and  preferences.  In  what  He  teaches 
and  requires  there  must  be  agreement  among  His 
disciples.  And  those  who  are  called  Lutherans 
have  heard  His  voice,  have  believed  His  Word, 
and  according  to  His  will  have  confessed  their 
faith  in  their  symbols.  Their  Confession  is  the 
expression  of  their  agreement  concerning  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Gospel.  It  contains  only  what  is 
necessary  ''unto  the  true  unity  of  the  Church." 
On  this  ground  they  have  united,  and  only  on  this 
ground  can  others  unite  with  them. 

The  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio,  assured  that  the  Evan- 
gelical Lutheran  Confession  sets  forth  the  pure 
faith  of  the  Gospel,  diligently  teaches  it  as  well  as 
confesses  it  with  the  Church  of  the  glorious  times 
of  the  Reformation,  and  earnestly  maintains  the 
necessity  of  its  acceptance  as  a  condition  of  recep- 
tion into  her  congregations  and  communion  at  her 


12  DISTINCTIVE  DOCTRINES  AND  USAGES 

altars.  She  does  not  grow  weary  of  plying*  the 
Catechism  and  inculcating  the  precious  truth  unto 
salvation  which  it  declares  in  a  form  as  simple  as  it 
is  profound  in  contents.  She  teaches  her  cate- 
chumens to  know  the  Saviour,  to  confess  Him  be- 
fore the  world,  and  to  walk  worthy  of  Him  who 
has  purchased  them  with  His  blood,  and  called 
them  into  His  kingdom.  She  is  glad  to  number 
them  among  her  communicants  when  they  are 
ready  to  make  the  requisite  confession  and  promise, 
but  not  until,  by  the  blessing  of  God,  this  end  has 
been  accomplished.  As  the  Church  is  the  congre- 
gation of  believers,  she  spares  no  effort  to  lead 
those  committed  to  her  instruction  to  an  explicit 
faith  before  she  leads  them  to  a  public  confession. 
She  insists  on  agreement  concerning  the  doctrine 
of  the  Gospel  in  all  cases  as  a  condition  of  fellow- 
ship in  the  Holy  Supper,  and  therefore  insists 
upon  the  acceptance  of  the  lyUtheran  Confession. 
She  does  this,  not  because  she  presumes  that  every 
particular  visible  Church  has  a  divine  right  to 
organize  on  any  basis  that  may  be  agreed  on  by 
the  persons  concerned,  and  then  to  insist  on  the 
acceptance  of  this  basis  as  a  condition  of  member- 
ship, simply  because  these  are  the  original  terms 
of  the  compact.  That  would  be  true  of  a  society 
that  is  purely  human  and  pretends  to  be  nothing 
else.  But  it  is  not  true  of  the  Christian  Church, 
which  is  not  an  association  of  men  for  purposes 
which  they  have  chosen  and  with  means  which 


OK  THE  JOINT  SYNOD  OF  OHIO.  13 

they  have  devised  according  to  their  own  wisdom 
or  pleasure.  Men  may  form  societies  and  lay 
down  their  own  terms  of  admission  and  member- 
ship as  they  think  best.  But  there  is  no  such 
right  to  do  what  men  please  in  the  kingdom  of 
Christ.  In  that  He  is  Lord,  and  only  those  who 
are  subject  to  Him  as  He  speaks  in  His  Word  are 
entitled  to  a  place  in  it.  To  be  a  congregation  of 
believers  the  members  must  accept  the  faith  de- 
clared in  the  Gospel,  and  in  order  to  have  unity 
they  must  agree  in  that  faith.  "Then  said  Jesus 
to  those  Jews  which  believed  on  Him,  If  ye  con- 
tinue in  my  word,  then  are  ye  m}'  disciples,  in- 
deed; and  ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth 
shall  make  you  free."  John  viii.  31,  32.  "Now, 
therefore,  ye  are  no  more  strangers  and  foreigners, 
but  fellow  citizens  with  the  saints,  and  of  the 
household  of  God,  and  are  built  upon  the  foun- 
dations of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ 
Himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone;  in  whom  all 
the  building  fitly  framed  together  groweth  unto  an 
holy  temple  in  the  Lord."  Eph.  ii.  19-21.  Those 
who  believe  in  the  Saviour  are  His  disciples,  and 
they  confess  His  name,  declare  His  truth,  and 
show  forth  His  praise.  The  righteousness  which 
is  of  faith  speaketh  on  thiswise,  "  The  Word  is 
nigh  thee,  even  in  thy  mouth  and  in  thy  heart; 
that  is,  the  Word  of  faith  which  we  preach;  that  if 
thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the  Lord  Jesus, 
and   shalt   believe   in   thy   heart    that   God    hath 


14  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

raised  Him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved. 
For  with  the  heart  man  believeth  unto  righteous- 
ness,  and  with  the  mouth  confession  is  made  unto 
salvation."  Rom.  x.  8-10.  By  this  confession 
Christians  know  each  other  as  disciples  of  the 
same  Lord,  and  on  the  ground  of  this  they  join  to- 
gether for  the  accomplishment  of  His  gracious 
will.  These  confessing  believers  are  exhorted  to 
"keep  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of 
peace."  "Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the 
name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  ye  all  speak 
the  same  thing,  and  that  there  be  no  divisions 
among  you;  but  that  ye  be  perfectly  joined  to- 
gether in  the  same  mind  and  in  the  same  judg- 
ment." I  Cor.  i.  10.  Christians  are  such  because 
they  believe  in  the  heavenly  truth  which  is  re- 
vealed for  our  salvation.  That  is  the  one  thing 
needful  in  church  organization.  Holding  and  con- 
fessing this,  they  may,  in  the  exercise  of  their  lib- 
erty, arrange  as  they  deem  expedient  what  the 
Master  has  not  ordained,  but  left  to  their  own  wis- 
dom. Congregations,  as  visible  associations,  may 
make  their  own  regulations  in  regard  to  matters  of 
indifference,  but  they  are  Christian  congregations 
in  virtue  of  their  Christian  faith  and  its  confession, 
not  in  virtue  of  their  human  regulations.  There 
can  be  no  legitimate  basis  of  union  in  the  Church 
but  that  which  the  Lord  lays  down,  and  there  can 
be  no  necessary  conditions  of  membership  and  fel- 
lowship in  the  Church  but  those  which  the  Lord 
prescribes. 


OF  THE  JOINT  SYNOD   OF  OHIO.  1 5 

The  question  of  union,  as  the  Joint  Synod  of 
Ohio  sees  it,  is  not  one  of  mere  expediency  and 
courtesy.  We  cannot  admit  that  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  erred  in  her  creed,  and  that  from 
the  start  she  sinned  by  uniting  on  that  foundation 
and  declining  to  unite  with  such  as  professed  a 
different  faith.  She  was  not  guilty  of  making 
needless  divisions  by  her  evangelical  confession. 
She  insisted  only  on  the  truth  which  the  Scrip- 
tures teach  and  required  only  what  the  Lord  re- 
quires as  conditions  of  membership.  She  cannot 
alter  these  conditions  now,  because  they  are  not 
of  her  making,  and  are  not  subject  to  her  wisdom 
or  her  pleasure.  They  are  obligatory  upon  her 
and  upon  all  men  by  the  authority  of  Him  who  is 
King  in  Zion.  For  this  reason  we  are  constrained 
to  stand  aloof  from  all  church  unions  founded  on 
any  other  basis  than  that  of  the  truth  revealed  in 
God's  Word  and  confessed  in  our  symbols,  and 
from  all  movements  and  demonstrations  of  a 
unionistic  character,  participating  in  which  would 
imply  the  admission  that  the  distinctive  doctrines 
of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  are  no  part 
of  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,  but  are 
merely  human  opinions,  and  therefore  have  no 
divine  right  in  Christendom.  We  heartily  desire 
the  union  of  Christians  and  of  churches,  but  can 
see  neither  fidelity  nor  expediency  in  a  pretense  of 
union  where  there  is  no  agreement  concerning  the 
doctrine  of  the  gospel  and  the  administration  of 


1 6  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

the  sacraments.  The  only  Scriptural  way  to  labor 
for  union  is  to  labor  for  unity  in  the  faith  and 
agreement  in  its  confession.  That  is  divinely  re- 
quired and  therefore  essential. 

It  is  this  that  has  prevented  our  organic  connec- 
tion even  with  other  bodies  that  bear  the  Lutheran 
name.  Of  right  this  name  stands  for  the  historic 
Church  of  the  Reformation  with  its  incomparable 
iVugsburg  Confession.  But  unhappily  not  all  who 
adopt  the  name  adopt  also  that  which  it  implies. 
Hence  it  comes  that  the  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio 
stands  alone,  notwithstanding  that  general  Luth- 
eran organizations  have  been  formed  around  her, 
and  notwithstanding  her  earnest  desire  that  there 
should  be  no  divisions  among  us. 

There  have  been,  and  there  still  are,  some  who 
accept  the  Augsburg  Confession  as  their  own,  but 
who  were  not  and  are  not  willing  to  declare  the 
faith  which  it  sets  forth  to  be  truly  and  really  the 
one  faith  of  the  gospel,  which  God  would  have  all 
men  to  receive,  and  agreement  in  which  is  neces- 
sary unto  the  true  unity  of  the  Church.  In  their 
own  convictions  they  are  in  accord  with  the  doc- 
trines there  confessed,  or  at  least  find  no  other  con- 
fession that  seems  to  them  a  more  adequate  ex- 
pression of  their  beliefs.  Many  of  them  love  the 
Lutheran  name  and  its  historic  associations.  But 
even  those  among  them  who  defend  the  distinctive 
doctrines  of  our  Confession  usually  regard  them  as 
opinions  which  at  most  have  equal  rights  with  the 


OF  THE  JOINT  SYNOD   OF   OHIO.  1 7 

opinions  proclaimed  by  other  denominations,  rather 
than  as  the  trnth  of  God  which  mnst  be  held  fast 
at  all  hazards  and  at  every  cost,  becanse  this  is  the 
Master's  will.  In  the  exercise  of  what  they  deem 
charity,  they  therefore  overlook  the  reqnirements 
of  faith.  The  prevailing  spirit  among  them  has 
accordingly  always  been  that  of  accommodation  to 
the  beliefs  and  practices  of  churches  that  have 
gained  the  ascendency  among  the  American  people. 
Some  have  even  allowed  themselves  to  be  largely 
governed  by  the  thought  tliat  what  the  great  mass 
of  professed  Christians  around  them  believe  and  do 
must  be  true  and  right,  and  that  the  creed  and 
practice  of  the  Lutheran  Church  should  be  shaped 
accordingly,  as  if  she  lived  and  could  live  only  by 
their  sufferance.  Therefore  evasive  formulas  were 
resorted  to  in  adopting  the  Confession,  and  servile 
concessions  were  made  to  popular  churches  which 
are  not  in  sympathy  with  the  faith  and  spirit  of  the 
Church  of  the  Reformation.  The  Joint  Synod  of 
Ohio,  sincere  in  her  confession  of  the  old  faith, 
could  not  and  can  not,  by  word  or  act,  accept  the 
consent  of  other  denominations  as  the  test  of  gospel 
truth,  and  could  not  and  can  not  form  an  organic 
union  wnth  a  body  in  which,  notwithstanding  the 
Lutheran  name,  men  could  make  open  assaults 
upon  the  doctrines  confessed  in  the  Catechism  and 
Augsburg  Confession  without  any  fear  of  being 
called  to  account  and  subjected  to  discipline. 
These  doctrines  are  taught  in  God's  Word,  and 
2 


l8  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES    AND   USAGES 

agreement  concerning  them  is  necessary  nnto  the 
true  unity  of  the  Church,  though  thousands  of  pro- 
fessing Christians  think  proper  to  dispute  them,  and 
think  tiiemselves  justifiable  in  setting  forth  a  differ- 
ent creed  and  organizing  cliurches  on  a  different 
basis. 

Even  the  formal  acceptance  of  the  Lutheran 
Confession  may  leave  room  for  legitimate  doubt 
whether  the  agreement  exists  which  is  necessary 
for  union.  Circumstances  may  be  such  as  to  force 
upon  us  the  inquiry,  whether  such  professed  accept- 
ance is  meant  as  implying  that  Romanist  and 
Reformed  parties,  secretists  and  chiliasts,  shall  not 
be  admitted  to  our  altars  and  churches.  Important 
differences  in  this  regard  between  us  and  others 
were  brought  to  view  in  the  controversy  respecting 
the  so-called  "four  points." 

Convinced  from  their  own  publications  of  the 
Antichristian  character  and  tendency  of  such  asso- 
ciations, the  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio  declares:  "The 
rule  among  us  must  be,  and  ever  remain,  that 
members  of  secret  societies  cannot  be  received  as 
members  of  our  congregations,  nor  may  they  con- 
tinue their  membership  or  be  admitted  to  the  Holy 
Supper  an  indefinite  length  of  time."  The  ground 
of  this  rule  is  not  merely  the  appearance  of  evil 
that  lies  in  their  shunning  the  light,  although  the 
element  of  secresy  is  on  this  ground  a  serious  ob- 
jection. It  awakens  just  suspicion,  to  which  a 
Christian  should  not  willingly  make  himself  sub- 


OF   THE  JOINT   SYNOD   OF   OHIO.  19 

ject.  But  the  evil  is  of  a  more  dire  and  dangerous 
nature.  When  a  society,  such  as  that  of  the  Free 
Masons,  Odd  Fellows,  and  those  of  similar  char- 
acter, inculcates  rationalistic  principles  subversive 
of  Christianity,  destroying  souls  by  leading  them 
to  trust  in  another  righteousness  than  that  of 
Christ,  and  to  engage  in  another  worship  than  that 
of  the  triune  God,  while  at  the  same  time  it  abuses 
the  sacred  oath  and  teaches  and  practices  a  so- 
called  charity  that  is  not  in  harmony  with  the 
gospel,  we  cannot  regard  its  adherents,  whatever 
their  professions  or  their  intentions  may  be,  as  in 
a  proper  condition  for  membership  in  the  Christian 
Church  and  communion  at  her  altar.  They  may 
not  all  be  aware  that  their  societies  operate  against 
the  truth  in  Jesus,  as  many  persons  are  not  aware 
that  in  their  natural  state  they  are  children  of 
wrath,  and  without  Christ  can  do  nothing.  But 
this  does  not  change  the  fact.  And  it  is  the 
Church's  calling  to  teach:  where  sin  is  not  seen 
she  must  expose  it,  and  where  the  saving  truth  is 
not  known  she  must  impart  it.  This  our  pastors 
are  willing  to  do  with  all  patience  and  with  all 
allowance  for  circumstances;  but  they  are  not  will- 
ing first  to  receive  secretists  into  church  fellowship 
and  afterwards  endeavor  to  do  the  work  necessary 
to  qualify  them  for  it.  While  all  secret  societies 
are  not  in  the  same  degree  in  conflict  with  Chris- 
tian faith  and  love,  and  a  difference  will  therefore 
be  made  in  dealing  with  them,  they  are  all  objec- 


20  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

tionable,  and  the  watchman  on  Zion's  walls  innst 
warn  against  them  and  seek  to  rescue  souls  from 
their  evil  influence.  With  those  who  are  willing 
to  do  nothing  against  these  antichristian  powers, 
and  say  nothing  while  souls  committed  to  their 
charge  are  led  to  ruin  by  secretisni,  we  are  not 
agreed. 

As  regards  chiliasm,  the  doctrine  that  Christ 
shall  return  to  reign  a  thousand  years  upon  earth 
prior  to  the  final  judgment,  the  Lutheran  confes- 
sors at  Augsburg  in  1530  declared,  that  "they  con- 
demn others  also  who  now  scatter  Jewish  opinions, 
that  before  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  the  godly 
shall  occupy  the  kingdom  of  the  world,  the  wicked 
being  everywhere  suppressed."  {Aicgsb.  Conf.^ 
Art.  XVII.)  The  kingdom  of  our  Lord  is  not  of 
this  world,  but  is  a  kingdom  of  grace  in  which  be- 
lievers are  prepared  for  the  kingdom  of  glory. 
According  to  the  Apostles'  Creed,  which  our  chil- 
dren learn  and  confess  before  they  are  admitted  to 
holy  communion,  Christ  shall  come  at  the  last  day, 
as  the  Scriptures  teach,  "to  judge  the  quick  and 
the  dead,"  not  to  establish  a  temporal  kingdom 
which  would  be  essentially  different  from  that 
which  is  already  established,  and  in  which  He 
reigns  by  His  word  and  sacraments  as  His  blessed 
means  of  grace  unto  salvation.  This  is  still  the 
voice  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  and 
with  this  we  are  in  complete  and  hearty  accord. 
We  ask  only  that  earnest  account  be  made  of  the 


OF   THE  JOINT   SYNOD   OF   OHIO.  21 

truth  confessed,  and  that  accordingly  no  doctrine 
be  sanctioned,  not  even  by  the  consent  implied  in 
silence,  which  conflicts  with  that  confession. 

In  the  eyes  of  the  Joint  Synod,  admitting  minis- 
ters of  other  churches  and  of  a  different  confession 
to  our  pulpits  is  inconsistent  with  her  profession  and 
her  duty.  Notwithstanding  all  the  abuse  heaped 
upon  us  for  entertaining  this  conviction,  we  must 
persist  in  holding  it  and  ordering  our  practice  ac- 
cordingly. Both  faith  and  charity  require  it.  We 
do  not  teach  that  ministers  of  other  churches  have 
no  valid  call  to  preach  the  Word  and  administer  the 
sacraments,  or  that  their  ministrations  are  without 
efficacy.  Nothing  of  that  sort  is  taught  in  the 
Scriptures,  and  nothing  of  that  sort  appears  in  our 
Confessions.  The  Lord  requires  that  ministers  be 
rightly  called  by  the  Church,  to  which  He  has  en- 
trusted the  means  of  grace,  but  does  not  command 
the  rite  of  ordination  to  make  the  call  valid,  and 
least  of  all  does  He  make  the  efficacy  of  the  Word 
and  sacrament  dependent  on  ecclesiastical  rites. 
As  far  as  any  hindrances  arising  from  such  ques- 
tions are  concerned,  pastors  of  other  churches  would 
be  cheerfully  welcomed  to  our  pulpits.  But  the 
Lutheran  Church  would  betray  the  insincerity  of 
her  confession  if  she  permitted  men  to  teach  in  her 
congregations  who  do  not  even  profess  to  believe 
her  doctrines,  and  who,  as  regards  the  distinctive 
articles  of  her  faith,  avow  their  dissent  from  her 
teaching.     Fully  assured  that  what  she  confesses 


22  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES  AND  USAGES 

is  the  truth,  which  God  requires  her  to  teach  for 
the  glory  of  His  name  and  the  salvation  of  souls 
purchased  by  His  blood,  she  cannot  entrust  the 
v/ork  of  teaching  in  her  churches  and  schools  to 
men  who  do  not  agree  with  her  concerning  the 
doctrine  of  the  gospel  which  she  publicly  proclaims 
in  her  symbols.  Even  if  preachers  of  other  de- 
nominations would,  in  order  to  gain  access  to  our 
pulpits,  give  satisfactory  assurances  that  they  will 
teach  nothing  at  variance  with  our  faith,  they 
could  not,  as  long  as  they  declare  their  adherence 
to  a  different  confession,  be  permitted  to  preach  to 
our  congregations.  That  act  of  pulpit  fellowship 
itself  would  be  understood  as  a  declaration  on  our 
part  that  the  differences  between  their  churches 
and  ours  are  not  of  such  a  nature  as  to  necessitate 
separate  organizations,  and  therefore  as  an  admis- 
sion that  we  are  maintaining  divisions  which  have 
no  ground  in  faith  and  conscience,  and  for  that 
reason  are  sinful.  The  Lutheran  Church  is  sin- 
cere in  her  confession,  and  therefore  cannot  con- 
sent, by  any  voluntary  act  of  hers,  to  make  the 
impression  that  in  her  estimation  her  distinctive 
doctrines  are  not  of  God  and  are  not  necessary  unto 
the  true  unity  of  the  Church.  Her  rule  is,  "Mark 
them  which  cause  divisions  and  offenses  contrary 
to  the  doctrine  which  ye  have  learned,  and  avoid 
them."  Rom.  xvi.  17.  Those  who  believe  what 
is  written  by  inspiration  of  God  for  their  learning, 
and  from   their  hearts  confess  what    they  believe 


OF    THE  JOINT   SYNOD   OF   OHIO.  23 

because  it  is  the  very  truth  of  God,  will  readily 
understand  why  no  considerations  of  courtesy  are 
permitted  to  move  us  in  opposition  to  the  require- 
ments of  faith. 

The  same  rule  applies  to  the  other  question  of 
altar  fellowship.  Admitting  members  of  other  de- 
nominations to  communion  in  our  churches  would 
be  practically  declaring  that  the  differences  between 
them  and  us  do  not  pertain  to  the  faith,  but  are 
mere  matters  of  humian  opinion;  that  therefore  the 
Lutheran  Church  has  grievously  erred  in  putting 
her  distinctive  doctrines  into  her  Confession  as  a 
part  of  the  Christian  Creed;  and  that  by  asserting 
agreement  in  these,  as  well  as  in  the  other  parts  of 
her  Confession,  to  be  requisite  to  true  unity,  and 
therefore  a  necessary  condition  of  membership  and 
fellowship,  she  has  made  needless  divisions  in  the 
Church,  The  Joint  Synod  sincerely  accepts  the 
Lutheran  Confession,  and  therefore  cannot  do  this. 
She  cannot  admit  that  the  Lutheran  Church  sets 
forth  human  opinions  as  articles  of  faith,  and  thus 
seeks  to  bind  human  ordinances  on  the  consciences 
of  Christ's  free  people.  In  her  eyes  such  an  admis- 
sion would  undermine  her  confessional  foundation 
and  brand  the  great  Church  of  the  Reformation  as 
an  unevangelical  sect,  which  before  God  has  no 
right  to  live.  Such  doctrines  as  those  taught  in 
our  Catechism  and  Augsburg  Confession  concern- 
ing Absolution,  Baptism,  and  the  Lord's  Supper, 
for  example,  are  not  products  of  human  reason,  or 


24  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES  AND   USAGES 

Opinions  that  rest  on  rational  probabilities.  They 
belong-  to  our  faith.  We  believe  them  because 
God's  Word  teaches  them,  and  we  confess  them 
because  we  believe  them.  If  others  do  not  believe 
them,  we  deplore  it  and  wish  it  were  otherwise,  but 
that  cannot  be  allowed  to  shake  or  disturb  our 
faith.  Their  conduct  is  not  our  rule  or  stand- 
ard. We  abide  by  the  Holy  Scriptures,  whatever 
attitude  others  may  assume  tow^ards  the  doctrines 
which  they  teach  us.  Meantime  it  does  not  enter 
our  hearts  to  think  or  say  that  all  other  denomina- 
tions are  not  churches,  or  that  their  members  are 
not  Christians.  The  imputation  to  us  of  such 
opinions  is  sheer  uncharitableness.  There  is  noth- 
ing to  warrant  and  nothing  to  justify  it.  We  hold 
no  such  opinions,  and  maintain  nothing  from 
which  they  could  be  justly  inferred.  There  are 
churches  that  err.  They  are  churches  notwith- 
standing their  errors,  and  they  would  not  be 
churches  if  there  were  no  Christian  believers 
among  them.  But  we  could  not  answer  for  it  on  the 
judgment  day  if  by  word  or  act  we  gave  our  sanc- 
tion to  their  error.  Who  shall  blame  us  for  leaving 
the  responsibility  for  it  to  those  who  make  divi- 
sions contrary  to  the  doctrine  which  we  have 
learned,  and  for  abiding  by  the  truth  of  the  gospel, 
notwithstanding  their  obstinate  persistence  in  error 
and  consequent  refusal  to  join  us  in  confessing  that 
truth?  Erring  denominations  may  still  retain 
enough  of  the  heavenly  doctrine  to  lead  souls  to 


OF   THE  JOINT   SYNOD   OF   OHIO.  25 

Christ,  the  only  and  the  all-sufficient  Saviour  of 
men,  and  may  thus  have  the  children  of  God  among 
them  who  properly  constitute  the  Church.  But 
that  does  not  render  their  errors  harmless.  On  the 
contrary,  these  are  a  source  of  constant  danger  to 
the  spiritual  life  of  the  individual  and  of  the  con- 
gregation. *'Shun  profane  and  vain  babblings, 
for  they  will  increase  unto  more  ungodliness;  and 
their  word  will  eat  as  doth  a  canker."  2  Tim.  ii. 
16,  17.  Error  spreads;  the  little  leaven  permitted 
to  work,  in  course  of  time  leavens  the  whole  lump. 
When  the  Church  becomes  indifferent  to  the  purity 
of  the  faith,  Satan  uses  his  opportunity  of  banish- 
ing the  truth  revealed  for  our  salvation  and  urging 
men  to  flee  for  refuge  to  their  own  natural  resources 
which  cannot  save.  The  subject  is  one  of  such 
serious  moment,  involving  the  glory  of  our  blessed 
Redeemer  and  the  salvation  of  millions  of  our 
ruined  race,  that  thoughtful  minds  and  loving 
hearts  must  look  with  amazement  upon  the  sad  and 
strange  spectacle  of  Christian  men  condemning 
the  firm  adherence  of  other  Christian  men  to  the 
saving  truth  which  they  have  learned  from  the 
Scriptures,  and  for  which,  according  to  the  divine 
command,  they  earnestly  contend,  even  if  such 
contention  result  in  the  separation  of  those  who 
will  not  accept  it.  If  some  will  not  join  us  in  con- 
fessing the  truth,  we  certainly  cannot  join  them  in 
confessing  their  error.  Neither  can  we  admit  such 
human    error    to    be   ultimately   as   good    and   as 


26  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 


effectual  for  salvation  as  the  good  tidings  revealed 
for  our  enlightenment  from  heaven.  We  cannot, 
in  our  loyalty  to  our  Lord,  do  otherwise  than  de- 
cline to  have  fellowship  at  the  altar  of  the  Lord 
with  tliose  who  teach  and  confess  othervv^ise  than 
the  Word  of  God  teaches.  As  to  whether  those 
who  present  themselves  for  communion  are  really 
Christians  or  not,  that  is,  as  to  whether  they  be- 
lieve in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  unto  the  saving  of 
the  soul  or  not,  that  is  altogether  a  different  mat- 
ter. It  is  well  for  all  to  bear  in  mind  that  under 
no  circumstances  is  it  man's  calling  or  business  to 
judge  the  heart.  That  is  God's  prerogative.  If  a 
person  is  not  willing  to  accept  the  truth  which  the 
Church  believes  and  confesses,  we  can  only  say  that 
he  is  not  yet  prepared  to  meet  the  conditions  of 
church  fellowship.  Of  that  the  Church  must  judge, 
and  nothing  more.  Our  pastors  are  ready  to  teach 
the  truth  which  by  the  grace  of  God  she  possesses. 
If  any  one  will  not  accept  instruction,  or  being  in- 
structed will  not  accept  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel, 
agreement  concerning  which  is  necessary  to  the 
true  unity  of  the  Church,  he  must  answer  for  it,  as 
we  must  answer  for  our  teaching  and  confession: 
God  is  his  judge,  as  He  is  ours.  In  view  of  that 
judgment  we  cannot  abandon  our  Scriptural  faith 
and  confession  and  make  other  terms  of  fellowship 
to  suit  his  dissenting  opinions. 

The  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio  has  alw^ays  been  willing 
to  make  due  allowance  for  hindrances  put  into  the 


OF   THE  JOINT   SYNOD    OF   OHIO.  2^] 

way  of  coiisi.^:tent  Lutheran  practice  by  customs 
handed  down  from  times  of  relaxed  vigilance.  She 
is  well  aware  that  where  unionism  and  secretisni 
have  held  sway  for  years  they  cannot  be  eradicated 
in  a  day.  She  does  not  expect  this.  She  advo- 
cates no  rash  and  revolutionary  measures.  But 
witli  her  Lutheran  Confession  she  insists  that 
agreement  concerning  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel  is 
a  necessary  condition  of  union  and  communion  in 
the  Church ;  that  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  concern- 
ing which  agreement  is  necessary,  is  set  forth  in 
her  confession  of  faith;  and  that  she  could  not  be 
faithful  if  she  admitted  that  in  any  case  snch  agree- 
ment is  not  necessary.  When  the  confessional 
principle  is  once  accepted  and  the  teaching  is  fully 
and  faithfully  conformed  to  it  as  the  regulative  of 
Church  practice,  she  can  patiently  w^ait  while  the 
Word  of  God  is  doing  its  work  in  the  congrega- 
tions. She  has  had  need  for  patience  in  her  own 
congregations,  and  has  need  for  patience  still.  But 
she  can  allow  no  exceptions  to  the  rule  that  those 
who  preach  in  her  pulpits  and  commune  at  her 
altars  must  agree  in  the  faith  wdiich  the  gospel 
teaches  and  which  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  confesses.  There  are  individuals  whose 
weakness  demands  great  tenderness  of  treatment 
and  whose  previous  training  pleads  for  patience; 
there  may  be  instances  in  which  it  is  difficnlt  to 
decide  whether  the  necessary  conditions  of  fellow- 
ship have  been   met,  and  which  leave  room  for  a 


28  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND  USAGES 

difference  of  judgment  in  this  regard;  but  these, 
like  all  other  cases,  must  be  treated  under  the  rule 
that  agreement  concerning  the  doctrine  of  the  gos- 
pel is  necessary  to  the  true  unity  of  the  Church,  not 
as  exceptions  that  justify  a  violation  of  the  confes- 
sional principle. 

To  candid  minds  it  must  be  apparent,  that  when 
a  body  claiming  to  be  Lutheran  finds  an  honest 
adherence  to  the  IvUtheran  faith  and  confession,  in 
doctrine  and  in  practice,  a  valid  ground  for  estab- 
lishing opposition  congregations  on  a  professedly 
more  liberal  basis,  to  the  great  detriment  of  sound 
evangelical  doctrine  and  discipline,  their  profes- 
sions of  agreement  with  us  cannot  be  accepted  with 
unquestioning  confidence.  Even  when  the  Confes- 
sions of  the  Lutheran  Church  are  formally  adopted, 
there  is  still  an  essential  disagreement  between 
those  who  hold  the  doctrines  there  set  forth  to  be 
the  eternal  truth  of  God,  agreement  in  which  is 
necessary  to  the  true  unity  of  the  Church,  and  those 
who,  while  they  profess  to  accept  them,  still  regard 
them  merely  as  the  expression  of  human  opinions 
which  we  have  not  even  the  right,  much  less  the  duty, 
to  enforce  in  Church  organization  and  discipline,  and 
disagreement  concerning  which  can,  therefore,  form 
no  barrier  to  Church  fellowship.  If  that  which  our 
Augsburg  Confession  publishes  as  the  pure  Chris- 
tian faith  is  the  very  truth  of  the  gospel,  given  by 
inspiration  of  God  in  the  Scriptures  for  all  men  and 
all  times,  we  can  only  insist  on  its  maintenance, 


OF  THE  JOINT  SYNOD   OF   OHIO.  29 

whether  men,  call  themselves  what  they  may,  ac- 
cept it  and  go  with  us,  or  reject  it  and  turn  away 
from  us;  if  it  be  not  the  blessed  truth  revealed 
from  heaven  for  our  learning  and  the  saving  of  our 
sinful  souls,  there  can  be  no  more  grievouss  sin 
than  that  of  attempting  to  lay  it  as  a  yoke  upon  the 
necks  of  God's  people,  and  making  and  maintain- 
ing divisions  on  account  of  it.  The  lyutheran 
Church  believes  the  truth  which  God  has  made 
known  to  her  by  the  gospel,  and  therefore  cannot 
think  of  relinquishing  it,  or  any  part  of  it,  for  the 
accommodation  of  those  who  decline  to  believe  it. 
That  is  the  position  of  the  Joint  Synod. 

On  the  subject  of  predestination,  which  has  been 
much  mooted  in  recent  years,  she  maintains  the 
same  fidelity  to  the  precious  truth  of  the  gospel. 
Practically  the  Lutheran  Church  has  always  been 
a  unit  in  the  rejection  of  those  gloomy  errors 
which  center  in  the  theory  of  absolute  election  to 
faith.  While  she  never  swerved  from  the  funda- 
mental truth  that  salvation  is  by  grace  alone,  she 
just  as  firmly  maintained  the  other  fundamental 
truth  that  salvation  is  by  faith  alone,  as  the  only 
means  by  which  the  soul  can  appropriate  the 
merits  of  Christ.  Nor  was  she  ever  moved  by  the 
reasoning  of  Reformed  churches,  plausible  as  it  is 
sometimes  made  to  appear,  that  if  faith  has  any 
influence  on  the  saving  of  the  soul,  man's  power 
and   merit  must  have  some  share  in  eflfectincr  the 

o 

salvation.     The  plain  teaching  of  the  Bible,  that 


30  DISTINCTIVH    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

all  is  due  to  God's  grace,  notwithstanding-  that 
faith  is  indispensable,  proves  such  reasoning  false. 
''For  by  grace  are  ye  saved  through  faith;  and 
that  not  of  yourselves:  it  is  the  gift  of  God."  Eph. 
ii.  8.  "For  God  so  loved  the  world  that  He  gave 
His  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth 
ill  Him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting 
life."  John  iii.  i6.  The  Holy  Spirit  knows  bet- 
ter than  man  in  his  pride  of  reason  what  is  requisite 
that  all  may  be  ascribed  to  grace  and  all  the  glory 
may  be  given  to  God.  Salvation  is  by  grace 
alone,  and  all  the  glory  of  it  belongs  to  God;  and 
yet  the  rule  is  clearly  revealed  that  "he  that  be- 
lieveth shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not 
shall  be  damned. "  Faith  is  necessary  to  salvation. 
For  human  thought  there  is  unquestionably  a  diffi- 
culty in  the  doctrine.  If  it  depends  wholly  on 
God's  will  who  shall  be  saved,  it  is  not  easy  to  see 
how,  since  the  Scriptures  declare  that  the  will  of 
God  is  the  salvation  of  all,  any  soul  should  be  lost; 
if  it  depends  in  any  degree  on  man,  it  is  not  easy 
to  see  how,  since  the  Scriptures  declare  that  all  are 
dead  in  trespasses  and  sins,  any  soul  should  be 
saved.  To  overcome  the  difficulty,  Calvinists 
assume  that  God  makes  a  difference  by  electing 
some  and  not  electing  others,  by  His  sovereign 
right  choosing  some  persons  whom  He  pleases  to 
save,  and  by  His  sovereign  might  accomplishing 
His  pleasure  in  the  chosen  few,  while  all  the  others 
are  passed  by  and   left  to  perish  in  their  helpless- 


OF   THE  JOINT   SYNOD   OF   OHIO.  31 

iiess.  The  dreadful  solution  satisfies  the  reason  of 
many,  though  it  may  shock  their  hearts,  and  in 
these  latter  evil  days  even  some  of  the  Lutheran 
name  have  been  induced  to  adopt  it  in  its  main 
features,  arguing  indeed  that  salvation  is  thus  still 
by  faith,  because  God  always  makes  believers  of 
those  whom  He  elects  to  salvation,  but  overlook- 
in":  the  fact  that  in  the  same  sense  salvation  is  bv 
good  works,  since  He  always  leads  His  people 
heavenward  in  the  paths  of  holiness.  No  reason- 
ing could  induce  the  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio  to  turn 
away  from  the  comforting  truth  of  the  gospel  for 
which  the  Lutheran  Church  contended  during  the 
past  centuries  of  her  history,  and  to  exchange  it 
for  Calvinistic  errors  which  her  teachers  have  again 
and  again  exposed  and  refuted  from  the  Holy 
Scriptures. 

But  she  does  not  on  that  account  adopt  the  other 
solution  which  reason  suggests  of  the  problem. 
Salvation  is  by  faith,  but  it  is  not  by  man's  power 
and  merit.  Faith  is  the  gift  of  God,  but  it  is  not 
forced  upon  any  man;  and  it  lias  no  merit  of  its 
own,  but  appropriates  Christ's  merit.  Salvation 
is  all  a  work  of  God's  grace,  and  all  the  praise  be- 
longs to  Him.  But  when  he  calls  men  by  the 
Gospel  it  is  His  will  that  not  only  an  elect  portion 
of  the  called,  but  that  all  should  believe  it  and  be 
saved,  and  He  ofifers  to  all  of  them  the  grace  need- 
ful to  this  end.  If  any  to  whom  the  Word  of  this 
salvation  is  sent  are  not  saved,  it  is  only  because 


32  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

the  will  of  God,  which  in  the  domain  of  grace 
never-  works  irresistibly  and  never  coerces  the 
human  will,  was  wilfully  resisted.  "How  often 
would  I,"  says  our  merciful  Saviour,  "have  gath- 
ered thy  children  together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth 
her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  w^ould  not." 
Matt.  xxii.  37.  "That,  however,"  says  our  Con- 
fession, "many  are  called  and  few^are  chosen,  does 
not  mean  that  God  is  unwilling  that  all  should  be 
saved;  but  the  reason  is  that  they  do  not  at  all  hear 
God's  Word,  but  wilfully  despise  it,  close  their 
ears  and  harden  their  hearts,  and  in  this  w^ay  fore- 
close the  ordinary  way  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  so  that 
He  cannot  effect  His  work  in  them,  or  when  it  is 
heard,  they  consider  it  of  no  account  and  do  not 
heed  it."  (Form.  Coiic.  526,  11).  By  this  we 
abide.  So  far  as  the  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio  is  con- 
cerned, it  is  utterly  vain  to  argue  that  after  all  our 
explanations  there  are  still  difficulties  in  our  doc- 
trine of  conversion  which  would  be  escaped  by 
adopting  the  Calvinistic  S3'stem.  It  is  vain,  be- 
cause she  builds  her  faith  on  Holy  Scripture,  not 
on  man's  speculative  ability  or  his  success  in  solv- 
ing theological  or  psychological  problems.  What- 
ever may  be  the  explanation  of  the  mystery  en- 
countered in  the  doctrine  of  human  conversion  by 
divine  grace,  we  are  quite  sure  that  it  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  unscriptural  assumption  that  with 
God  there  is  respect  of  persons,  and  that  He  saves 
some  because  He  wills  it  and  elects  them  to  faith 


OF   THE  JOINT  SYNOD   OF   OHIO  33 

and  salvation,  and  does  not  save  others  becanse 
He  had  not  the  will  to  elect  them.  He  would 
have  all  men  to  be  saved  and  to  come  to  a  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,  and  is  "not  willing  that  any 
should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  repent- 
ance." 2  Pet.  iii.  9.  The  responsibility  of  choos- 
ing death  rather  than  life  rests  wholly  upon  the 
unbelieving  sinner,  in  no  respect  and  in  no  degree 
upon  our  blessed  Lord,  who  left  nothing  undone 
that  His  grace  could  do  to  effect  the  salvation  of 
all  alike.  The  doctrine  of  an  absolute  election,  in 
which  no  reference  is  had  to  the  soul's  relation  to 
Christ  by  faith,  solves  difficulties  only  at  the  ex- 
pense of  gospel  grace  and  truth  and  comfort,  and 
in  fidelity  to  Christ  and  the  Church  we  can  only 
reject  it. 

The  Evangelical  Lutheran  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio 
and  Other  States  stands  alone,  not  because  she  closes 
her  eyes  to  the  importance  of  uniting  Synods  and 
churches,  and  not  because  she  has  any  special  the- 
ological or  ecclesiastical  tendencies  to  maintain,  or 
any  peculiar  phase  of  Lutheranism  to  advocate, 
but  simply  because  she  believes  the  sacred  truth 
which  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  confesses, 
holds  it  to  be  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel  concerning 
which  agreement  is  necessary  to  the  true  unity  of 
the  Church,  and  can  therefore  unite  with  others  on 
no  other  basis,  hearing  and  heeding  what  the  Spirit 
saith  unto  the  churches:  "Hold  that  fast  which 
thou  hast,  that  no  man  take  thy  crown." 


THE  GENERAL  SYNOD. 

BY 

REV.  PROF.  M.  VALENTINE,  D.  D.,  LL.D. 


OCCASION  OF   ORGANIZATION. 

THE  General  Synod  was  formed  in  1820,  in  order 
to  complete  the  organization  of  the  Lutheran 
Church  in  the  United  States,  uniting  its  different 
Synods  in  fellowship  and  work.  Before  that  time 
there  was  no  general  body  to  exhibit  its  unity,  or 
through  which  all  parts  could  co-operate  in  com- 
mon effort  for  its  proper  development  and  pros- 
perity. Every  denomination  necessarily  has  cer- 
tain interests  and  enterprises,  such  as  Education, 
Home  and  Foreign  Missions,  and  Church  Exten- 
sion, that  can  be  properly  and  efficiently  carried  on 
only  by  concerted  action  and  the  help  of  the  whole 
communion.  At  that  period  our  Church  in  Amer- 
ica reached  the  streuQ^th  and  wide  territorial  ex- 
pansion  that  called  for  the  advantages  of  such  a 
general  confederation.  Then,  and  for  these  reasons 
and  general  purposes,  the  General  Synod  came  into 
being.     Some  of  these  objects  may  not  have  been 

(34) 


OF  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD  35 

definitely  and  fully  included  in  the  design  of  the 
founders,  but  manifestly,  as  events  soon  showed, 
they  were  included  in  the  eye  and  ordering-  of 
Providence.  The  General  Synod  thus  arose  in  the 
normal  and  regular  course  of  our  Church's  devel- 
opment and  proper  organization  in  this  land. 

The  need  of  this  completing  step  was  clearly 
seen  and  deeply  felt.  There  was  no  general  organ- 
ization in  existence  providing  for  the  necessary 
union.  One  had  to  be  created.  The  origin  of  the 
General  Synod  was  thus  not  only  legitimate,  as 
arising  in  the  natural  and  normal  order  of  our 
Church's  progress  in  our  country,  but  demanded 
by  the  pressing  work  to  which  God  was  calling  it. 
It  exists,  clearly,  as  a  product  of  that  divine  Provi- 
dence which  was  leading  the  Lutheran  Church  in 
the  United  States  onward  to  complete  organization 
and  unity  for  its  great  spiritual  mission  and  work. 
This  feature  of  its  origin  is  part  of  the  General 
Synod's  peculiar  honor,  and  a  fact  that  rightly 
exalts  it  in  Cliristian  regard.  Its  organization 
formed  a  great  Providential  epoch  in  the  develop- 
ment and  history  of  our  Church  in  America. 

Most  fittingly,  therefore,  the  Constitution  of  tlie 
body  places  these  fundamental  ideas  at  the  very 
basis  of  its  existence,  as  formed:  "Relying  upon 
God  our  Father,  in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  under  the  guidance  and  direction  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  Word  of  God,  for  the  promotion 
of  the  practice  of  brotherly  love,  to  the  furtherance 


36  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINEvS   AND   USAGES 

of  Christian  concord,  to  the  firm  establishment  and 
continnance  of  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond 
of  peace,  and  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  grand 
design  for  which  the  Church  of  Christ  was  estab- 
lished on  earth."     (Preamble.) 

The  first  step  to  this  organization  was  taken  by 
the  Synod  of  Pennsylvania,  which  at  that  time 
embraced  the  majority  of  the  Lutheran  churches 
and  pastors  in  the  United  States.  There  were, 
however,  four  other  Synods  already  formed,  viz. : 
the  Synod  of  New  York,  the  Synod  of  Maryland 
and  Virginia,  the  Synod  of  North  Carolina,  and  the 
Synod  of  Ohio.  The  fellowship  between  these 
Synods  had  been  limited  to  interchange  of  delegates 
and  other  casual  intercommunication.  At  the  meet- 
ing of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  at  Harrisburg,  Pa., 
in  1819,  it  declared  it  to  be  "desirable  that  the  dif- 
ferent Evangelical  Lutheran  Synods  in  the  United 
States  should  in  some  way  or  other  stand  in  closer 
connection  with  each  other,"  and  appointed  a  com- 
mittee to  consider  and  prepare  a  feasible  plan  for 
such  a  union.  In  Baltimore,  the  next  year,  this 
committee  reported  a  plan  which,  after  careful  dis- 
cussion, w^as  adopted,  and  submitted  to  the  separate 
Synods.  Upon  the  approval  of  the  plan  by  them 
a  convention  was  called  and  held  in  Hagerstown, 
Md.,  October  22,  1820,  and  the  organization  form- 
ally effected.  The  Synod  of  Ohio,  however,  failed 
to  appear  or  unite  with  the  organization. 


OF  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD.  37 

GROWTH. 

The  growth  of  the  General  Synod,  beginning 
with  these  four  bodies,  may  be  seen  in  the  follow- 
ing statement,  exhibiting,  at  intervals  of  ten  years, 
the  number  of  Synods,  ministers,  and  communi- 
cant members  belonging  to  it,  viz: 

Date.              Synods.  Miiiisters.              Communicants. 

1820 4  100 

1830 3  76  14,118 

I840 7  130  29,106 

1850 16  364  63,401 

i860 26  864  164,226 

1870 21  647  98,077 

1880 23  845  125,317 

1890 24  1002  164,640 

The  decrease,  as  seen  in  this  statement  between 
i860  and  1S70,  is  explained  by  the  separation  of 
all  the  five  Synods  of  the  southern  States,  viz:  of 
North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Virginia,  Western 
Virginia,  and  Texas,  in  consequence  of  the  civil 
war,  and  also  by  the  withdrawal  of  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Synod,  the  Synod  of  New  York,  the  English 
Synod  of  Ohio,  and  a  portion  of  the  Pittsburgh 
Synod,  which  formed  or  afterward  united  with 
the  General  Council.  When  it  is  remembered 
that  these  withdrawals  left  less  than  half  of  its  al- 
ready attained  church-membership,  these  figures 
v/ill  show  that  despite  that  immense  loss,  the 
General  Synod  has  had  a  wonderfully  rapid  growth 
and  prosperity. 


38  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

GENERAL   PRINCIPLES. 

The  general  principles  which  controlled  the  form 
and  constitntion  of  the  body  were  snch  as  arose 
from  the  actual  condition  of  the  Church  and  the 
objects  sought  to  be  attained  through  the  organi- 
zation. These  objects  were,  primarily,  not  doc- 
trinal, hwt practical.  It  was  wanted  as  a  union  for 
fellowship  and  earnest  church  work  and  enterprise. 
In  it  the  Synods  came  together  on  the  recognized 
and  unquestioned  fact  that  the  bodies  so  uniting 
were  Evangelical  IvUtheran  bodies.  The  wise  and 
godly  founders  w^ere  men  of  great  spiritual  earnest- 
ness, all  aglow  with  intelligent  zeal  for  the  pros- 
perity and  extension  of  our  American  branch  of 
the  great  Church  of  the  Reformation.  They  were 
true  sons  of  Issachar,  understanding  the  times, 
and  knowing  what  our  Lutheran  Israel  ought  to 
do,  I  Chron.  xii.  32. 

As  the  union  was  thus  formed  for  fellowship  in 
practical  enterprise,  in  the  way  of  united  effort 
and  labor  for  the  upbuilding  of  the  Church  and 
the  right  accomplishment  of  its  work,  the  charac- 
ter and  powers  of  the  organization  were  adjusted 
especially  to  this  grand  design.  No  worthier  or 
nobler  aim  could  have  guided  its  founders.  Yet, 
though  not  primarily  meant  for  the  settling  of 
doctrinal  questions  or  dogmatic  views,  the  General 
Synod  at  once  put  a  solid  IvUtheran  basis  under 
the  practical  work  it  undertook,  as  for  instance, 
in  the  Constitution  of  the  Theological  Seminary 


OF   THE   GENERAL   SYNOD.  39 

which  it  immediately  proceeded  to  establish  at 
Gettysburg.  In  this  it  enacted  the  law:  ''In  this 
Seminary  sliall  be  taught,  in  the  German  and  Eng- 
lish languages,  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the 
Sacred  Scriptures,  as  contained  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession."  Similar  regard  to  the  distinctive 
Lutheran  system  of  theology  was  shown  in  the 
Constitution  which  it  prepared  for  Synods.  It 
began  its  practical  work  with  this  high  emphasis 
on  Lutheran  doctrine.  //  took  the  lead  in  estab- 
lishing among  ics  the  proper  aiitJiority  of  our 
ChtircJC s  g reat  Confession. 

DOCTRINAL   BASIS. 

The  doctrinal  basis  of  the  General  Synod  is  given 
in  its  Constitution,  and  in  a  resolution  adopted  in 
connection  with  the  declaration  of  its  confessional 
requirement. 

The  Constitution  requires  all  Synods  uniting 
with  it  to  '''Receive  and hold^  with  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  CImrch  of  our  fathers^  the  Word  of  God 
as  contained  in  the  caitonical  Scriptzires  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments^  as  the  only  infallible  rule  of 
faith  and  practice^  and  the  Augsburg  Confession  as 
a  correct  exhibition  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
the  divine  Word^  and  of  the  faith  of  our  Church 
as  founded  upon  that  IVord^  (]Minutes  of  General 
Synod,  1864.) 

The  resohition^  adopted  at  the  same  time,  as  an 
explanatory  declaration  upon  a  number  of  points  ou 


40  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

which  the  correctness  of  the  Augsburg  Confession 
had  been  called  in  question,  is  as  follows: 

"This  General  Synod,  resting  on  the  Word  of 
God  as  the  sole  authority  in  matters  of  faith,  on  its 
infallible  warrant  rejects  the  Romish  doctrine  of  the 
real  presence  or  transubstantiation,  and  with  it  the 
doctrine  of  consubstantiation;  rejects  the  Romish 
Mass  and  all  the  ceremonies  distinctive  of  the  Mass; 
denies  any  power  in  the  sacraments  as  an  opus  op- 
eraiiiin,  or  that  the  blessings  of  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper  can  be  received  without  faith;  re- 
jects auricular  confession  and  priestly  absolution; 
holds  that  there  is  no  priesthood  on  earth  but  that 
of  all  believers,  and  that  God  only  can  forgive  sins; 
and  maintains  the  divine  obligation  of  the  Sab- 
bath." 

This  explanation,  as  repudiating  some  errors 
that  had  been  alleged  to  be  in  the  Confession,  and 
affirming  its  real  sense,  must  be  regarded  as  part 
of  the  General  Synod's  doctrinal  position.  It  is 
not  meant,  however,  as  either  taking  anything 
away  from  the  teaching  of  the  Confession  or  adding 
anything  to  it. 

The  General  Synod,  it  will  be  observed,  grounds 
its  doctrinal  position  in  a  twofold  way.  First  and 
absolutelv  on  ^^  the  Word  of  God^^  as  contained  in 
the  holy  Scriptures.  This  it  takes  as  "  the  only  in- 
fallible rule  of  faith  ajid  practice  ^^ — sole  norm  and 
final  umpire.  Secondly,  on  ''^ the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession^   This  it  receives  and  adopts  as  "a  correct 


OF  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD.  41 

exhibitioji  of  the  fujidainental  doctrines  of  the  divine 
Word  and  of  the  faith  of  our  Church  asfotmdedttpon 
that  JVord.''^  The  Augsburg  Confession  therefore, 
the  adoption  of  which  is  required  of  Synods  as  con- 
ditional for  entrance,  becomes  the  statement  of  the 
doctrinal  position  and  teaching  of  the  General 
Synod.  In  harmony  with  this  basis,  it  has  also 
set  forth  Luther's  Small  Catechism  as  its  hand- 
book and  guide  in  catechetical  instruction. 

THE    AUGSBURG  CONFESSION   ONLY. 

The  General  Synod  does  not  include  in  its  con- 
fessional basis  any  of  the  other  writings  that  have 
been,  to  greater  or  less  extent,  accepted  as  doctrinal 
standards  in  some  places,  such  as  The  Apology  to 
the  Augsburg  Confession,  Luther's  Larger  Cate- 
chism, the  Smalkald  Articles,  and  especially  the 
Formula  Concord iae  of  1580. 

The  reasons  for  not  enforcing  obligation  to  these 
are: 

First ^  that  the  Augsburg  Confession  is  the  only 
universal  symbol  of  the  Liitheran  faith^  the  one 
standard  that  alone  has  jnarked  and  authenticated 
it  ahvays  and  everyzvhere.  It  identifies  the  Luth- 
eran Church  the  world  over — "the  Church  of  the 
Au^sburo-  Confession."  The  doctrinal  definitions 
and  developments  in  the  other  writings,  especialh- 
in  the  Formula  Concordiae,  so  far  as  they  are  not 
contained  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  are  not 
essential  to  the  Lutheran  doctrinal  system.     They 


42  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

form  "developments"  which,  in  proportion  to  the 
stress  laid  on  tliem,  constitute  types  or  varieties  of 
Lutheran  explanation,  but  not  generic  Lutheranism 
itself 

Secondly^  these  other  symbols  have  never  been 
necessary  to  constitute  a  Lutheran  Chnrch.  A  half- 
century  of  the  existence  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
passed  before  the  Formula  Concordise  was  written, 
the  symbol  that  is  most  strenuously  advocated  by 
some.  And  after  it  was  written  it  was  never  uni- 
versally received  or  made  binding.  It  has  always 
been  more  or  less  disowned,  and  a  source  of  con- 
tention. The  Lutheran  Church  has  existed  and 
done  its  grand  work  in  whole  countries  without  it, 
standing  forth  at  the  time  and  in  history  in  unim- 
peachable and  undiminished  Lutheran  rank  and 
honor,  as  in  Denmark,  Sweden,  Holstein,  Pomer- 
ania,  Anhalt,  Hesse,  the  Palatinate  of  Zweibriicken, 
Brunswick,  Nuremberg,  and  elsewhere.  So  also  iu 
many  Lutheran  cities.  Those  that  did  not  adopt 
it  could  not  be  deprived  of  their  Lutheran  stand- 
ing, but  maintained  their  true  Lutheran  freedom 
upon  the  basis  of  the  great  fundamental  Confession 
of  Augsburg.  Of  our  Church  in  Denmark  at  the 
present  time,  one  of  her  clergymen  has  just  now 
written:  "As  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Danish  Church, 
she  accepts  as  her  symbols,  besides  the  three  oecu- 
menical symbols,  the  Confessio  Augustanainvariata 
[the  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession]  and  Luther's 
Lesser   Catechism.     The  other   symbolical   books 


OF  THE   GENERAL  SYNOD.  43 

of  the  Lutheran  Churches  do  not  concern  us  at 
all."* 

Thirdly^  these  additional  symbols  are  not  adapted 
to  2inite  tJie  wliole  Liitheran  Church.  Their  par- 
ticular explanations  and  developments  toucliing 
different  views  and  tendencies  that  from  the  first 
and  always  have  had  place  and  advocacy  in  the 
Church,  do  not  unite,  but  separate  between  those 
who  agree  upon  the  common  basis  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  and  would  be  one.  The  specific 
developments  and  extended  definitions,  pressing 
disputed  points  one-sidedly  into  narrowest  particu- 
larity, or  unnecessary  prominence,  have  not  worked 
unity  or  union,  but  organized  parties  and  divisions. 
They  can  unify  only  fractions,  greater  or  less,  of 
the  whole  Church,  in  separation  from  other  parts, 
as  history  clearly  shows.  How  ill-adapted  and 
inefficient  a  required  adoption  of  the  whole  mass  of 
these  symbols  is  to  unite  the  Church,  is  plain 
from  the  painful  fact  that  the  general  bodies  in 
tliis  country  actually  adopting  them  have  neverthe- 
less been,  and  are,  arrayed  against  each  other,  and 
refuse  each  other  fellowship  in  pulpit  and  at  altar. 

Fbiu'thly.,  in  the  adoption  of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession alone  as  its  basis,  the  General  Synod  allows 
full  liberty  to  persons  within  it  to  accept  for  them- 
selves SiWy  or  all  of  the  special  doctrinal  views,  even 
down  to  the  minutest  particulars,  of  the  rest  of  the 
so-called  symbols.     Its  mode  and  measure  of  con- 

*  Handbook  of  Lutheranisni,  p.  86. 


44  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

fessional  subscription  excludes  no  one,  as  it  op- 
presses no  one.  Nothing  can  exclude  liim,  except 
his  personal  unwillingness  to  hold  fellowship  and 
co-operate  in  church  work  with  brethren  who  fail 
to  agree  exactly  with  his  own  accepted  explanation 
of  each  and  every  aspect  of  Lutheran  teaching, 
making  fellowship  and  co-operation  dependent  on 
being  able,  or  allowed,  to  impose  his  own  particu- 
lar conceptions  on  all  his  brethren.  The  General 
Synod's  basis  is  thus  wisely  and  lovingly  adapted 
to  unite  all  real  Lutherans.  They  are  invited  to 
stand  and  work  together,  in  the  use  and  concession 
of  liberty,  on  the  common  ground  of  the  Church's 
great  system  of  doctrine.  The  only  limitation  of 
the  liberty  of  those  who  believe  and  accept  for 
themselves  even  every  specification  of  the  Form  of 
Concord,  is  the  disallowance  of  a  sometimes  as- 
sumed right  of  imposing  their  particularity  or 
particularities  upon  the  rest ;  or  the  use  of  the 
freedom  and  places  of  trust  of  the  General  Synod  to 
abridge  or  subvert  its  liberal,  generic,  catholic  basis 
and  spirit,  for  a  contracted  and  intolerant  one.  The 
exclusion  of  such  intolerant  temper  and  demand  is 
essential  at  once  to  the  General  Synod's  catholic 
basis  itself,  and  to  the  permanence  of  its  own  ex- 
istence. 

JUSTICE   AND  SAFETY  OF  THIS   BASIS. 

On  this  basis  the  General  Synod  is  secured  on 
both  sides.     On  the  one  side  it  is  secured  \w  fidelity 


OF  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD.  45 

to  the  Luther  ail  sy  stein  of  doctrine ;  on  the  other 
against  the  narrozv7tess  and  wrong  of  obliging  any 
real  Lutherans  to  stand  outside. 

By  the  first,  it  is  placed  in  the  true  and  unques- 
tionable succession  of  the  historic  Lutheran  Church, 
with  its  positive  and  full  maintenance  of  the 
saving  doctrines  of  the  gospel.  For  the  Augsburg 
Confession  is  no  "negative"  exhibition  of  Chris- 
tianity. It  asks  no  one  to  breathe  in  a  vacuum. 
It  is  a  most  positive  and  full  assertion  of  the  fun- 
damental and  savins:  doctrines  of  the  divine  word 
and  of  the  faith  of  our  Church  as  founded  on  that 
word;  a  generic  but  positive  creed,  well  suited  to 
be  the  universal  symbol  of  the  revived  Christianity 
which  Luther  and  his  co-laborers  meant  to  restore 
to  the  whole  world.  The  General  Synod  is  thus 
fully  secured  upon  our  Cluirch's  historic  and  safe 
foundations. 

By  the  second  security,  it  is  guarded  against 
the  injustice  of  excluding  any  genuine  Lutherans, 
though  for  themselves  they  may  hold  any  or  all  the 
doctrinal  specifications  and  developments  found  in 
the  rest  of  the  so-called  symbols.  It  neither  forces 
nor  leaves  any  necessity  for  antagonistic  Lutheran 
general  organizations.  The  General  Synod  be- 
lieves that  unless  there  is  an  undue  magnifying  of 
merely  incidental  or  unessential  points,  peculiar 
to  some  partisan  contention,  and  with  proper 
Christian  and  fraternal  spirit,  the  whole  Lutheran 
Church  in  our  land  can,  as  it  ought  to,  unite  and 


46  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

work  together  on  the  basis  of  our  generic  Lutheran 
Creed. 

THE   POSSIBILITY   OF   UNION. 

It  thus  becomes  clear  that  the  General  Synod, 
representing  our  Lutheran  Church  in  its  true 
doctrines  and  full  breadth  and  greatness,  apart 
from  any  special  type,  offers  the  only  hope  of  ever 
composing  our  strifes  and  ending  our  divisions. 
On  the  common  Confessio7t  of  Aitgsbitrg  all  LntJier- 
ans  agree.  It  is  vain  to  hope  for  unity  or  union 
in  America  on  the  restrictive  basis  upon  which 
three  centuries  of  effort  have  not  given  it  in 
Europe.  For  those  who  demand  the  Form  of  Con- 
cord divide  as  to  its  teachings  and  implications  and 
refuse  each  other  fellowship.  The  Lutheranism 
of  this  country,  a  meeting  place  of  the  Lutherans 
from  all  lands,  ought  to  be  nothing  smaller  than 
the  Lutheranism  of  the  whole  Church.  The  wis- 
dom and  necessity  of  the  General  Synod's  basis, 
in  this  connection,  cannot  be  better  or  more  decis- 
ively expressed  than  in  the  words  of  Dr.  Krauth, 
in  1857:  "The  Augsburg  Confession  is  the  symbol 
which  alone  has  been  recognized  always,  every- 
where, and  by  all  Lutherans,  as  their  Confession  ; 
and  as  Lutheranism  in  America  should  rest  on 
nothing  that  is  local  or  national,  but  should  em- 
body only  that  which  is  common  to  the  Lutheran- 
ism of  all  lands,  it  is  a  vital  point  she  [the  General 
Synod]  should  acknowledge  as  her  creed  that  only 


OF  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD.  47 

whose  reception  in  the  Church  has  been  universah 
The  Augsburg  Confession  is  the  symbol  of  Lu- 
theran catholicity  ;  all  the  other  distinctive  por- 
tions of  the  Book  of  Concord  are  symbols  of  Lu- 
theran particularity,  creeds  of  Lutheran  Churches, 
but  not  in  an  undisputed  sense  of  the  Lutheran 
Church." 

It  is  manifestly  not  necessary,  therefore,  nor  even 
consistent,  in  this  connection,  to  attempt  to  specify 
and  set  forth  the  precise  Lutheran  teaching  of  the 
General  Synod,  on  the  various  topics  in  controversy 
in  our  Church;  since  it  is  of  the  very  essence  of  its 
confessional  position  and  claim  that  the  Augsburg 
Confession  is  itself  the  statement  of  what  it  holds, 
and  that  in  the  differences  of  understanding  and 
explanation  that  have  alw^ays  marked  the  interpre- 
tation of  some  of  its  statements,  undisturbed  liberty 
shall  be  enjoyed.  In  this  its  Lutheranism  is  both 
true  in  itself,  and  just  to  the  whole  great  Lutheran 
Church  of  the  Reformation  and  of  history. 

WORSHIP. 

With  respect  to  Worship  the  General  Synod  is 
in  harmony  with  the  liturgical  principles  which 
from  the  first  obtained  in  our  Church.  It  looks 
upon  a  moderate,  evangelical,  spiritual  Order  of 
Service,  properly  connected  with  the  best  devo- 
tional usage  of  our  past,  as  of  great  importance. 
But  it  holds,  with  the  Augsburg  Confession,  Art. 
VII.,  that  sameness  or  uniformity  of  ceremonies  is 


48  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

not  essential.  A  general  uniformity  is  felt  to  be 
desirable,  but  not  held  to  be  necessary.  According 
to  the  well-established  Lutheran  principle,  asserted 
by  Luther  and  set  forth  in  early  Lutheran  Orders 
themselves,  the  use  of  particular  forms  of  service  h 
regarded  as  belonging,  not  to  the  sphere  of  law, 
but  to  the  freedom  of  the  congregations.  This 
freedom  the  General  Synod  does  not  abridge,  but 
defends.  The  Forms  of  Service  set  forth  are  not 
enforced,  and  may  not  be,  by  authority  or  con- 
straint, and  are  to  be  used  by  the  churches  only  as 
they  are  found  to  be  to  edification  and  conducive 
to  the  best  spiritual  life  and  work  of  the  Church. 
Under  this  freedom,  the  principle  of  adaptation  to 
new  conditions  and  circumstances,  followed  in  the 
earliest  construction  of  Lutheran  liturgies,  is  em- 
phasized as  still  presenting  both  a  right  and  a  duty, 
in  the  altered  conditions  of  our  Church  in  this 
country.  As  long  as  congregations  order  their 
worship  in  harmony  with  the  doctrines  of  the  gos- 
pel, as  set  fortli  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  their 
Lutheran  standing  is  not  disturbed  by  such  adap- 
tive modifications. 

The  General  Synod  has  practically  adjusted  itself 
to  these  acknowledged  principles  of  our  Church  on 
the  subject  of  worship,  and  to  her  historic  usage, 
seeking  at  once  proper  conformity  to  the  moderate 
liturgical  Orders  of  the  past,  and  needful  adapta- 
tion to  the  present  conditions  and  necessities,  and 
submitting:  Foruis  of  Service  for  the  free  use  of  the 


OF   THE   GENERAL  SYNOD.  49 

con.f^rega lions,  as  they  may  be  found  adapted  to 
edification  of  the  Christian  life  and  tlie  evangeliza- 
tion of  the  world. 

DOCTRINE   AND   LIFE. 

The  revival  of  deep  evangelical  piety  in  Ger- 
many under  the  spiritual  labors  of  Spener,  Arndt, 
Francke,  and  their  associates,  which  reached  our 
country  through  the  great  and  consecrated  labors 
of  the  patriarch  Muhlenberg  and  other  godly  min- 
isters from  Halle,  gave  its  clear  and  strong  impress 
to  the  religious  life  of  the  churches  and  S}nods 
that  formed  the  General  Synod.  That  great  and 
gracious  quickening  that  had  come  as  a  renewal  of 
formal  orthodoxy  to  its  true  life,  restored  the  heart 
again  to  its  place  in  religion.  Its  grand  import 
was  that  the  pure  doctrine  is  not  to  stand  apart  from 
daily  life,  but,  under  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
is  to  appear  in  a  truly  renewed,  sanctified,  and  holy 
character.  The  truth  is  not  to  be  "held  in  un- 
righteousness" of  life.  ''Christ  in  us;"  is  to  be 
emphasized  as  well  as  Christ  "for  us."  To  be  a 
Christian  means  more  than  an  assent  to  an  ortho- 
dox creed  and  the  outward  formalities  of  sacra- 
ments and  church-membership.  True  faith  is  to 
be  understood  as  meaning,  not  a  mere  cold,  unspir- 
itual  acceptance  of  the  general  and  particular  doc- 
trines of  Christianity,  but  especially  a  living  ap- 
propriation by  the  believing  heart  (Rom.  x:  10)  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  all  his  saving  ofiices  and 
4 


50  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

saiictifyino;-  grace — such  a  vital  faith  as  becomes, 
through  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  Word,  the  power  of 
a  new  and  holy  life  in  obedience  and  love.  This 
connection  of  the  General  Synod,  as  inheriting,  in 
the  way  mentioned,  some  of  the  best  fruits  of  that 
great  spiritual  awakening,  which  thus  restored  the 
deep,  earnest  piety  for  which  the  Lutheran  Refor- 
mation originally  stood,  has  given  to  this  body  a 
clear  and  positive  characteristic  that  has  marked  its 
whole  history.  The  essential  idea  of  that  restora- 
tive movement — living  piety  along  with  orthodox 
belief — has  remained  vital  in  the  General  Synod. 
It  is  traceable  in  many  aspects  or  features  of  com- 
mon personal  piety,  of  congregational  order  and 
custom,  and  of  general  church  life.  It  is  seen  in 
the  prevalent  type  of  preaching,  earnest,  searching 
and  practical,  closely  applying  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus  to  the  state  of  the  heart  and  the  requirements 
of  personal  duty  and  Christian  temper  in  all  the  re- 
lations of  life  and  conduct.  It  has  caused  the  min- 
isters of  the  body  to  be  the  ever-pronounced  foes  of 
prevalent  evils,  and  champions  of  every  good  cause. 
It  has  fostered  mid-w^eek  devotional  services, 
prayer-meetings,  Sunday-schools,  and  Bible  classes, 
and  is  ever  ready  to  use  every  auxiliary,  in  har- 
mony with  the  teaching  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  for 
the  development  of  Christian  activity  and  the  doing 
of  good.  It  has  given  to  catechetical  instruction  a 
tender  and  faithful  spirituality  that  makes  this 
fjreat  aQ:encv   for  the  conversion  and  salvation  of 


OF   THE  GENERAL   SYNOD.  51 

the  young  most  efFectnal  for  the  precious  objects 
for  which  catechisation  has  its  prominent  place 
among  the  usages  of  our  Church.  The  General 
Synod  has  always  stood  for  a  living  piety. 

CATECHISATION. 

The  General  Synod  thoroughly  adopts  and  ex- 
alts to  its  full  place  of  prominence  this  custom  of 
our  Church,  for  the  proper  instruction  of  the  young 
and  their  right  preparation  for  admission  to  Com- 
munion. While  not  neo^lectinor  the  solemn  obliea- 
tion,  through  faithful  preaching  of  the  gospel,  to 
seek  conversions  from  the  world  and  brino^  in  those 
that  are  without,  it  lays  the  utmost  stress  upon  the 
duty  of  bringing  up  the  young  in  the  "nurture  and 
admonition  of  the  Lord,"  especially  those  to  whom 
God,  through  holy  baptism,  has  given  the" adop- 
tion of  children,"  that  they  may  become,  and  truly 
be,  in  heart  and  life,  all  that  is  meant  in  their 
divinely-given  church-membership.  As  "the 
force,  value,  and  blessing  of  the  baptismal  covenant 
and  grace  are  to  extend  through  their  w^hole  snbse- 
sequent  lives,"  the  method  of  their  proper  care  and 
spiritual  development  is  regarded  as  distinctly  edu- 
cational, under  the  reo^eneratino-  and  sanctifvine 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost  through  the  truth  as  it  is 
in  Jesus  Christ.  And  the  General  Synod  seeks  to 
gather  thus  into  the  catechetical  class  also  the  yet 
unbaptized  children  and  adults  from  the  w^orld,  and 
in  this  way  bring  them  to  true  and  living  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ,  and  into  the  Church. 


52  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

This  cateclnsation,  therefore,  is  not  looked  upon 
as  a  mere  routine  formality,  or  a  process  of  simply 
intellectual  indoctrination,  that  shall,  of  course^  ter- 
minate in  confirmation,  irrespective  of  genuine 
faith,  spiritual  interest,  or  a  purpose  of  true  Chris- 
tian obedience  on  the  part  of  the  catechumen.  Its 
true  use  seeks  to  bring  each  one  to  real  sorrow  for 
sin,  a  heartfelt  trust  in  the  I^ord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
a  sincere  consecration  to  Him  in  loving  obedience 
and  service,  so  that  a  truly  Christian  life  shall  fol- 
low, which  shall  be  continually  a  better  and  fuller 
development  of  the  grace  of  adoption  and  purifica- 
tion which  God  has  covenanted  in  holy  baptism. 
Constant  care  is  taken,  that  in  the  hands  of  a 
spiritual  and  faithful  ministry,  this  venerable  cus- 
tom of  instructing  the  young  and  applying  the 
great  truths  of  the  gospel  to  their  hearts,  may  yield 
its  best  results,  in  a  well-taught,  intelligent  and 
truly  spiritual  church-membership. 

BENEVOLENT  WORK. 

The  General  Synod  has  never  forgotten  the 
practical  aims  to  which  it  was  especially  conse- 
crated by  its  organization — the  strengthening  and 
enlargement  of  the  Church  and  the  advancement 
of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom.  From  the  first,  and 
always,  it  has  bent  its  earnest  endeavors  to  the 
various  forms  of  Church  work  that  have  seemed 
best  adapted  to  these  ends.  However  imperfectly 
it  has  wrooight,  always  falling  short  of  its  desires, 


OF   THE   GENERAL   SYNOD.  53 

it  has  still  achieved  an  unspeakably  great  service 
for  our  Lutheran  Church  in  x\merica,  especially  in 
its  Anglicized  development.  Its  organization  be- 
came the  source  and  epoch  of  a  new  and  energetic 
Church-life,  aggressive  activity,  and  rapid  progress 
over  its  whole  territory. 

This  benevolent  work  has  been,  and  is,  directed 
mainly  to  Education,  Home  and  Foreign  Missions, 
Church  Extension,  care  of  Orphans,  and  Publica- 
tion and  circulation  of  Church  Literature.  Fol- 
lowing the  establishment,  already  mentioned,  of 
the  Theological  Seminary  at  Gettysburg  in  1826, 
directly  by  the  General  Synod  itself,  there  were 
successively  founded,  under  its  auspices  or  by 
synods  or  associations  connected  with  the  General 
Synod,  Pennsylvania  College,  Gettysburg,  Pa.,  in 
1832;  Wittenberg  College  and  Seminary,  Spring- 
field, O.,  in  1845;  Roanoke  College,  Salem,  Va,, 
in  1853;  Newberry  College,  at  Newberry,  S.  C, 
in  1858;  North  Carolina  College,  Mount  Pleasant, 
N.  C,  in  1858;  Missionary  Institute,  Selin's 
Grove,  Pa.,  in  185S;  Carthage  College,  Carthage, 
111.,  in  1870;  and  Watts  Memorial  College,  Gun- 
tur,  India,  in  1886;  Midland  College,  Atchison, 
Kans.,  in  1887.  Hartwick  Seminary  w^as  organ- 
ized in  1815,  before  the  formation  of  the  General 
Synod,  but  came,  and  has  remained,  under  its 
general  auspices.  The  two  Female  Seminaries, 
that  at  Hagerstown,  Md.,  in  1852,  and  that  at  Lu- 
therville,  j^.Id.,  in  1S53,  are  also  products  of  the 
General  Synod  church-life  and  work. 


54  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

In  1835  the  Parent  Education  Society  was 
formed,  which  has  worked  with  great  efficiency  in 
aiding  young  men  in  their  preparation  for  the 
ministry,  though  at  present  the  various  district 
synods  have  committees  of  their  own  through 
which  they  are  conducting  this  service.  In  1835 
a  Foreign  Missionary  Society,  and  in  1845  ^  Home 
Missionary  Society,  were  organized  under  the 
auspices  of  the  General  Synod.  Foreign  Mission 
work  was  established  in  India  in  1842,  and  in  Af- 
rica in  i860,  which,  in  both  places,  has  received 
manifest  evidences  of  divine  favor,  and  developed 
into  large  prosperity.  A  Church  Extension  Soci- 
ety was  organized  in  1853,  to  aid  struggling  mis- 
sion congregations  in  the  erection  of  church  edi- 
fices. An  Orphans'  Home  was  established  in  1867, 
at  Loysville,  Pa.,  to  whose  support  and  enlarge- 
ment our  eastern  Synods  regularly  contribute.  In 
1855  the  Lutheran  Publication  Society  was  organ- 
ized, the  purpose  of  which  is  "the  diffusion  of 
religious  knowledge  and  the  furnishing  and  circu- 
lating of  suitable  church  literature,  in  harmony 
with  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the  General  Synod  o^ 
the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  the  United 
States."  From  small  beginnings  this  Society  has 
grown  into  grand  efficiency,  circulating  an  im- 
mense amount  of  our  Church  literature,  and  con- 
ducting a  business  through  its  Publication  House 
that  amounted  for  the  year  ending  March  31,  1891, 
to  $73,200.76,  and  contributing  largely  of  its  profits 


OF   THE   GENERAL   SYNOD.  55 

to  the  benevolent  objects  of  the  Church.  In  1S43 
a  Lutheran  Historical  Society  was  organized,  not 
indeed  as  an  exclusively  General  Synod  Associa- 
tion, yet  originated  among  its  members,  with  its 
regular  meetings,  according  to  Constitution,  held 
in  coivnection  with  the  conventions  of  the  General 
Synod.  With  the  active  co-operation  of  members 
of  other  IvUtheran  bodies,  there  has  thus  been 
gathered  a  Library  of  Lutheran  publications  in 
this  country  and  other  materials  of  American  Lu- 
theran history,  of  priceless  value,  preserved  in  the 
Theological  Seminary  at  Gettysburg.  The  Wo- 
man's Home  and  Foreign  Missionary  Society, 
formed  in  1877,  ^o  co-operate  with  the  General 
Synod's  Boards,  deserves,  by  its  strength  and  effi- 
ciency, to  be  named  among  the  important  organi- 
zations of  the  Church. 

The  simple  enumeration  of  these  educational 
institutions  and  other  agencies  of  religious  work 
thus  established,  can  only  faintly  suggest  the 
splendid  development  of  the  Christian  life,  activ- 
ity, resources  and  power  which  the  General  Synod 
has,  through  them,  accomplished  for  our  Church 
in  this  land.  These  institutions,  all  of  them  doing 
efficient  service,  and  some  of  them  growing  into 
proportions  of  great  power  and  prominence,  are 
sending  their  blessed  influence  from  shore  to  shore, 
and  across  the  seas,  and  honoring  our  Church  in 
the  face  of  the  whole  nation.  All  these  agencies 
taken  together  have  given  us  most  that  is  encour- 


56  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

aging  and  cheering  in  the  present  possibilities  and 
prospects  of  onr  Church,  placing  it  on  the  high 
road  to  the  proper  accomplishment  of  its  divinely- 
given  mission  and  work  in  our  land. 

CHURCH    BOARDS. 

The  General  Synod,  since  1871,  conducts  its 
work  of  Foreign  Missions,  Home  Missions,  and 
Church  Extension  through  Boards  appointed  and 
controlled  by  itself, — superseding  with  these  the 
Societies  of  earlier  date.  Under  the  zealous  man- 
agement of  these  Boards,  constituted  of  prudent 
and  earnest  ministers  and  laymen  in  equal  number, 
these  great  departments  of  Churqh  benevolence  and 
enterprise  have  been  rapidly  developed  and  brought 
to  a  most  encouraging  efficency.  By  this  method 
of  carrvino;  on  these  leading^  forms  of  benevolent 
work,  the  Church's  efforts  in  each  of  them  can  be 
best  harmonized  and  unified,  and  all  the  details 
consistently  directed  to  the  surest  and  largest  re- 
sults. The  actual  results  are  strongly  testifying 
to  the  wisdom  of  the  method.  The  following  sta- 
tistics of  contributions,  at  intervals  of  ten  years, 
will  give  some  idea  of  the  immense  progress  the 
body  is  making  in  its  benevolent  work — the  figures 
in  every  case  expressing  the  contributions  for  two 
years : 

Foreign  Missions. 

1871 .^13,540. 

18S1 32,133- 

1891 97,543- 


OF  THE   GENERAL  SYNOD.  57 

Home  Missions. 

1871 $21,767. 

1881 26,190. 

1891 75,974- 

Church  Extension. 

1871 te928. 

1881 23,405. 

1891 79,855- 

THE   ENGLISH    LANGUAGE. 

The  General  Synod  has  not  only  been  the  pio- 
neer in  the  Anglicizing  process  among  our 
churches,  but  it  in  fact  embraces  the  great  body 
of  the  English-speaking  Lutherans  in  the  United 
States.  It  peculiarly  represents  this  idea  and  its 
results,  and  looks  upon  this  as  one  portion  of  its 
great  and  special  mission  for  the  proper  prosperity, 
rank  and  power  of  our  Lutheran  Church  in  this 
land.  For  our  true  position  and  influence  cannot 
be  rightly  achieved  as  a  Church  of  an  alien  tongue 
or  of  alien  tongues.  However  interesting  and 
adapted  to  present  necessities  our  Church's  poly- 
glot character  may  now  be,  the  attainment  of  its 
right  rank  and  influence  in  this  country  requires 
it  to  become  as  rapidly  as  possible  an  English- 
speaking  Church.  The  General  Synod  keeps  this 
steadily  and  practically  in  view.  Though  neither 
insensible  nor  indifferent  to  the  spiritual  interests 
and  welfare  of  the  thousands  and  thousands  of  Luth- 
erans of  other  tongues  that  annually  come  to  these 


58  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINKS   AND   USAGES 

shores,  and  though  rejoicing  in  their  numbers  and 
prosperity,  and  glad  to  have  their  churches  or 
synods  in  connection  with  itself,  yet,  in  the  posi- 
tion in  which  Providence  has  placed  it,  the  Gen- 
eral Synod  feels  that,  linguistically,  it  must  stand 
mainly  for  the  unification  and  life  of  our  Church 
as  a  Church  of  this  English-speaking  nation. 

AMERICAN. 

The  General  Synod  holds  that  the  Lutheran 
Church,  which  consists  not  at  all  in  any  accidents 
of  language  or  other  peculiarities  of  the  nation  or 
land  of  its  denominational  birth,  but  in  the  main- 
tenance of  the  full,  pure  gospel  of  salvation  it  con- 
fesses and  preaches,  has  a  world-wide  adaptation 
and  vocation.  Not,  therefore,  in  the  sense  of  a  rup- 
ture from  its  system  of  doctrine  and  true  principles 
of  its  application,  but  as  adapting  itself  to  the  new 
and  peculiar  conditions  and  life  of  our  own  coun- 
try, it  assumes  that  the  Lutheran  Church  here 
must  be  an  American  Church.  It  cannot  take  its 
proper  place  or  accomplish  its  true  work  in  and  for 
our  land,  if  it  insists  on  being  a  foreign  Churchy 
whether  in  language  or  in  any  of  the  other  inci- 
dental features  that  may  have  become  associated 
with  its  order,  customs  or  life  in  German  or  Scan- 
dinavian nationalities.  In  things  not  of  the  essence 
of  Lutheranism,  the  Church  must  stand  in  touch 
with  American  life.  A  foreign  spirit  or  type  is 
isolation  and  displacement  from  our  Church's  right 


OF   THE   GENERAL  SYNOD.  59 

relation  for  its  true  spiritual  vocation  here — a  mal- 
adjustment for  effective  work  and  full  service.  In 
this  sense  the  General  Synod  stands  for  an  Ameri- 
can Lutheran  Church. 

RELATION  TO  NON-LUTHERAN   DENOMINATIONS. 

Mindful  of  our  Saviour's  prayer  for  the  unity  of 
His  followers  (John  xvii.  21,  23),  the  General 
Synod,  in  its  Constitution  (Art.  IV.,  Sec.  7),  pre- 
scribes for  itself  the  duty  of  being-  "-^  sedulously 
and  incessantly  regardful  of  the  circimistances  of 
the  times,  aiid  of  every  casual  rise  and  progress 
of  unity  of  sentiment  among  Christians  in  gen- 
eral, in  orde}'  that  the  blessed  opportunities  to 
promote  concord  and  iinity,  and  the  interests  of 
the  Redeemer^  s  kingdom,  may  not  pass  by  ne- 
glected and  unavailing.^ ^  In  accordance  with  this, 
and  not  holding  that  the  Lutheran  Church  is  the 
only  Christian  Church,  the  General  Synod  culti- 
vates fraternal  relations  with  the  other  branches  of 
orthodox  Protestantism.  While  holding  the  truth 
as  our  Church  confesses  it,  and  thus  witnessing 
against  contrary  views,  it  still  ''believes  in  one 
holy  Catholic  Church,"  "which  is  gathered  from 
every  nation  under  the  sun,"  "the  congregation 
of  saints,  confessing  one  gospel,  having  the  same 
knowledge  of  Christ,  and  one  Holy  Spirit,  who  re- 
news, sanctifies  and  rules  their  hearts"  (Apol. 
Conf.,  Arts.  VII.  and  VIII.).  The  General  Synod, 
therefore,  confessing  thus  the  essential  oneness  of 


6o  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

believers  in  the  one  divine  Head  of  the  Church, 
practicall}'  also  reco<^nizes  this  spiritual  and  real 
brotherhood.  It  maintains  fraternal  correspond- 
ence, or  interchange  of  courtesies  by  delegates, 
with  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  the  General  Assembly  of  the  United  Pres- 
byterian Church,  the  Reformed  (Dutch)  Church  in 
America,  the  Reformed  (German)  Church  in  the 
United  States,  and  the  General  Conference  of  the 
United  Brethren  Church.  It  enacts  no  restrictive 
law  against  fellowship  in  pulpit  or  at  altar,  but 
allows  to  both  ministers  and  members  the  freedom 
of  conscience  and  love  in  this  matter. 

THE   OUTLOOK. 

The  General  Synod,  thus  organized  upon  a  basis 
which  secures  at  once  the  Lutheran  system  of  doc- 
trine and  the  true  catholicity  of  our  Church,  and 
presenting  the  cheering  spectacle  of  a  union  of 
twenty-five  prosperous  and  growing  synods  which 
represent  the  great  body  of  the  English-speaking 
IvUtherans  in  the  United  States,  actuated  by  intel- 
ligent zeal  in  developing  the  Church's  resources 
and  activities  for  its  best  enlargement  and  prosper- 
ity and  the  extension  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom, 
with  efficient  Colleges  and  Seminaries  and  Boards 
and  other  agencies  of  success  and  strength,  all 
wisely  adjusted  to  the  conditions  for  effective  ser- 
vice and  permanent  growth,  influence,  and  power 
in  America,  is  justly  regarded  as  having  been  pro- 


OF  THE   GENERAL  SYNOD.  6 1 

videntially  prepared  and  divinely  intended  for 
leadership  in  achieving  the  mission  and  work  of 
the  Lutheran  Church  in  this  country.  The  Gen- 
eral Synod  believes  that  the  great  future  of  our 
Church  in  the  United  States  belongs  to  and  is 
reached  by  the  line  of  movement  marked  out  in 
the  principles,  ideas,  and  spirit  of  this  general 
organization.  Its  catholic  Lutheran  basis,  offering 
the  only  hope  of  union,  and  its  practical  principles, 
adjusting  it  to  our  land  and  times,  are  prophetic  of 
its  great  and  blessed  providential  task,  and  warrant 
the  belief  that  it  represents,  in  its  general  and  es- 
sential characteristics,  the  great  Lutheran  Church 
of  the  coming  centuries  in  America.  In  this  con- 
ception, it  holds  the  maintenance  of  its  permanent 
existence  and  integrity  as  a  sacred  privilege  and 
duty. 


THE  GERiVlAN  IOWA  SYNOD. 

BY 

REV.  PROF.  S.  FRITSCHEL,  D.  D. 


THE  Synod  of  Iowa  and  Adjacent  States,  which 
at  the  present  time  nnmbers  nearly  300  minis- 
ters, embraces  six  districts  covering  an  area  com- 
prising twelve  States  and  Territories,  from  Ohio 
to  Washington,  and  from  Minnesota  and  Dakota 
down  to  Missonri  and  Kentuck}^,  and  was  fonnded 
the  24th  of  Augnst,  1854,  by  three  ministers,  one 
candidate  (who  was  to  go  as  missionary  to  the  In- 
dians), and  one  lay  delegate.  All  the  members  of 
the  newly  organized  body  were  sent  from  Germany 
by  the  Rev.  W.  Loehe  and  the  Society  for  Home 
Missions  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  Bavaria.  This 
vSociety  previously,  in  connection  with  the  Mis- 
souri Synod,  had  been  doing  a  blessed  missionary 
work  among  the  immigrants  in  the  central  States 
of  the  Union.  It  represented  a  strictly  confessional 
as  well  as  oecumenical  Lutheranism.  The  worlc  thus 
commenced  was  to  be  carried  on  by  the  Iowa  Synod. 
The  congregation  at    St.  Sebald,   la.,  a  Lutheran 

(6^) 


OF   THE   GERMAN    IOWA   SYNOD.  63 

Church  colony  in  whose  midst  the  organization  of 
the  Synod  took  place,  and  the  Theological  Semi- 
nary at  Dubuque,  la.,  which  was  to  furnish  min- 
isters for  the  missionary  work  of  the  Synod,  were 
founded  by  Loehe.  Indeed,  the  organization  of 
the  Synod  itself  took  place  under  his  advice  and 
auspices,  as  had  been  the  case  before  when  the 
Missouri  Synod  was  established.  This  connection 
with  Loehe  has  given  to  the  Synod  from  its  very 
beginning  the  peculiar  chnrchly  character,  which 
in  the  course  of  time,  though  developed  and  set 
forth  more  distinctly,  it  has  always  faithfully  pre- 
served. 

I.  Its  first  synodical  declaration  was  an  2inre' 
served  acknowledg77tejit  of  the  Cojifessions  of  the 
Littheran  Church.  This  is  the  unalterable  basis 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  Synod,  as  well  as  of  its 
congregations.  The  Synod  as  such  accepts  the 
zvhole  of  the  Symbolical  Books .^  as  contained  in  the 
Concordia  of  1580,  whilst  as  to  the  Constitutions 
of  the  individual  congregations,  an  explicit  ac- 
knowledgment of  the  unaltered  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion and  of  Luther's  Catechism  is  considered  suffi- 
cient, because  by  such  acknowledgment  the 
congregations,  on  their  part,  implicitly  accept  the 
whole  of  the  Lutheran  Confessions.  The  Synod 
does  not  want  to  have  this  Confession  accepted  only 
as  to  single  portions  or  its  essential  parts,  but  fully 
and  in  all  its  doctrines.  It  acknowledges  just  as 
explicitly  its  thetical2&  its  antithetical  decisions  and 


64  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

declarations.  It  confesses  what  the  Lutheran  Sym- 
bols confess^  over  against  the  corresponding  error, 
and  rejects  zvith  equal  decidedness  all  errors  rejected 
by  them.  It  discountenances  every  acceptar.ce  of 
the  Lutlieran  Symbols  by  which  they  are  accepted 
with  the  reservation  as  far  as  they  are  in  harmony 
with  the  "Word  of  God,"  because  by  this  their 
conformity  with  the  Scriptures  would  be  put  in 
question;  on  the  contrary,  it  accepts  them  as  its 
own  Confession,  because  it  is  convinced  of  their 
conformity  with  the  Scripture.  This  Confession, 
therefore,  is  as  well  its  i^tile  of  all  teaching  and 
practice  in  the  church  as  also  the  bond  of  church 
fellozvship.  The  Synod  does  not  allow  in  its  midst 
any  doctrine  or  administration  of  the  Sacraments, 
any  church-  or  text-books,  any  regulations  pertain- 
ing to  divine  service,  that  would  be  antagonistic  to 
the  Symbols,  and  it  makes  it  the  duty  of  its  Presi- 
dents and  Visitors  to  see  that  no  deviations  of  this 
kind  be  permitted.  And  whilst  on  the  one  hand  it 
readily  holds  fellowships  especially  altar  fellov/ship, 
with  such  as  are  one  with  it  in  faith  and  confes- 
sion, though  they  may  differ  in  unessential  points, 
yet  on  the  other  hand  it  must,  for  the  sake  of  truth, 
and  on  account  of  the  great  importance  of  tlie  Con- 
fession, deny  fellowship  to  those  that  do  not  accept 
the  same  Confession  with  it.  According  to  the 
Constitutions  of  S3^nod  and  congregations,  only 
such  persons  can  be  admitted  as  members  of  a  con- 
gregation, who  accept  the  Confession  of  the  Luth- 


OF  THE  GERMAN  IOWA  SYNOD.        65 

eidH  clniich;  and  only  such  coiigregations  as 
make  the  Lutheran  Confession  their  own  can  be 
admitted  as  members  of  synod.  And  only  such 
7ninisters  as  bind  themselves  to  the  Concordia  are 
intrusted  with  the  ministry. 

However,  in  assigning  this  dominating  position 
to  the  Confessions,  the  Iowa  Synod  has  always  tried 
to  guard  against  the  exaggeraiiojts  hy  which  the 
Confessions  are  put  on  a  level  with  the  Word  of 
God,  and  are  given  a  weight  which  is  due  only  to 
the  latter.  The  synod  is  in  earnest  when  it  con- 
fesses that  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  the  only  true  rule 
by  which  all  teachers  and  all  doctrines  are  to  be 
measured  and  judged,  and  it  does  not  derive  the 
normative  authority  of  the  teachings  of  the  Confes- 
sion from  the  fact  that  they  are  the  decisions  of  the 
Church,  but  from  the  fact  that  they  are  \\\^p2ire  and 
gemtine  exposition  and  i^iterpretation  cf  the  Divine 
Word.  It  lias  therefore  in  all  its  practice  followed 
a  biblical-practical  course,  and  has  tried,  guided  by 
the  Confessions^  to  recur  in  all  cases  and  questions, 
to  the  Scriptures  themselves,  and  to  draw  from  them 
directly.  The  Symbols  are  not  considered,  like  the 
Scriptures,  as  judge?,  but  as  a  witness  and  declara- 
tion ot  the  faith,  as  to  how  at  any  time  the  Holy 
Scriptures  have  been  understood  and  explained  in 
the  articles  in  controversy  in  the  church  of  God  by 
those  wlio  then  lived,  and  how  the  opposite  dogma 
was  rejected  and  condemned.  On  account  of  this 
historical  view  of  the  Symbols,  the  Iowa  Synod  does 
5 


66  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

not  see  in  them  a  code  of  law  of  atomistic  dogmas 
of  equal  value  and  equal  weight,  but  an  organic 
expression  of  the  living  connection  of  the  faith  of 
the  Church.  Accordingly,  there  is  a  distinction  to 
be  made  between  the  dogmas^  properly  speakings 
and  other  parts  of  the  Symbols;  as  e.  g.  the  frequent 
exegetical,  historical  and  other  deductions,  illus- 
trations and  demonstrations.  Only  the  former,  i. 
e.  the  dogmas,  constitute  the  Confession,  whilst 
the  latter  partake  of  this  dignity  only  indirectly, 
inasmuch  as  they  define  the  dogmas  more  clearly. 
What  the  Symbols  state  and  intend  as  a  confessio7t^ 
the  articles  and  doctrines  of  faith,  this  it  is,  to 
which  the  Synod  is  bound,  not  because  they  are 
the  Church's  decisions  of  the  controversies  that 
have  come  up,  but  because  they  present  the  saving 
truth  and  doctrine  of  the  Scripture.  The  Church 
is  bound  to  accept  these  doctrines  which  constitute 
the  Confession  in  their  totality,  without  exception^ 
whilst  the  demand  of  doctrinal  conformity  by  no 
means  includes  all  unesse^ttial  opinions  which  are 
07tly  occasionally  mentioned  in  the  Symbols.  Thus 
e.  g.  the  obligation  to  the  Symbols  by  no  means 
refers  equally  to  the  article  concerning  the  concep- 
tion of  Christ  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  to  the  doc- 
trine of  the  perpetual  virginity  of  Mary,  though 
the  latter  occasionally  occurs  in  the  Smalcald 
Articles.  This  would  be  a  leo^alistic  misuse  of 
the  Symbols  against  which  the  Iowa  Synod  has 
always  protested. 


OF   THE    GERMAN    IOWA    SYNOD.  67 

The  Synod  however  is  far  from  being  satisfied 
with  a  merely  formal  adherence  to  the  Confessions. 
It  does  not  wish  to  lay  np  the  inheritance  of  pure 
doctrine  and  faith  which  we  have  received  from 
our  fathers  in  a  napkin,  but  considers  it  as  a 
pound  which  is  to  be  employed  most  profitably. 
It  discountenances  all  dead  orthodoxy,  and  next  to 
the  purity  of  doctrine  and  a  scriptural  administra- 
tion of  the  sacraments  it  lays  all  stress  upon  showing 
the  faith  in  a  Christian  life.  It  emphasizes  true 
conversion,  repentance  and  faith,  by  personal  assur- 
ance of  salvation  and  a  godly  life.  It  has  from  its 
beginning  tried  to  enforce  strict  church  discipline  in 
its  congregations,  and  their  Constitutions  require  of 
those  who  seek  to  be  admitted  to  membership  evi- 
dence of  a  Christian  life.  Such  discipline  it  also 
endeavors  to  enforce  in  regard  to  secret  societies^ 
against  which  its  congregations  are  earnestly 
warned.  In  all  relations  of  Christian  and  church- 
life  it  urges  the  necessity  of  showing  the  true 
faith  in  good  works:  in  rendering  aid  to  its 
needy  members,  widows  and  orphans,  in  the 
work  of  Home  and  Foreign  Missions,  and  in  fos- 
tering a  proper  arrangement  of  Christian  worship, 
and  a  right  development  of  the  congregational  and 
churchly  life  in  general.  From  the  beginning  the 
Synod  has  designated  this  tendency  as  a  striving 
after  a  more  perfect  development  of  the  Lutheran 
Church.  Although  we  must  lament  that  in  all 
these  points  the  ideal  aimed  at  has  not  as  yet  been 


68  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES    AND    USAGES 

attained,  nevertheless  the  Synod  is  still  striving 
for  this  object  with  untiring  zeal.  She  also  is 
striving  after  a  growing  richer  and  deeper  knowl- 
edge, but  only  on  the  basis  of  the  Symbols  under 
the  guidance  of  the  divine  Word. 

If,  therefore,  on  the  one  hand,  the  synod  decidedly 
rejects  every  imaginary  progress  and  every  so-called 
development  of  the  dogma,  antagonistic  to  the 
Confession,  it  acknowledges  on  the  other  hand  as 
true  progress  and  development  in  the  right  direc- 
tion, all  development  that  grows,  out  of  this  prin- 
ciple and  stays  within  the  limits  of  the  same.  To 
such  progress  the  synod  is  open,  for  such  there  is 
room  in  it,  and  within  these  limits  it  is  striving 
for  a  greater  perfection. 

2.  Out  of  this  fundamental  confessional  position 
of  the  Iowa  Synod  there  neccessarily  results  the 
attitude  it  has  assumed  in  the  several  controversies 
in  which  it  has  been  involved.  The  organization 
of  the  Iowa  Synod  was  caused  by  the  fact  that  the 
Missouri  Synod  in  its  controversy  with  the  Synod 
of  Buffalo  concerning  the  ChnrcJi  and  the  ministry^ 
would  no  longer  suffer  in  its  midst  nor  admit  to  its 
membership  the  men  sent  by  Loehe  who  would 
not  agree  with  Missouri's  views.  Then,  as  they 
could  neither  side  with  Buffalo  nor  with  Missouri 
they  commenced  a  new,  independent  activity  further 
West.  Thus  the  synod  found  itself  in  its  very  in- 
cipiency  involved  in  a  doctrinal  controversy  in 
which  the  principal  point  between  itself  and  Mis- 


OF   THE   GERMAN    IOWA   SYNOD.  69 

soiiri  was  the  so-called  Ucbertragungslchre^  the 
doctrine  concerning  the  conferring  of  the  office 
upon  the  minister.  The  Iowa  Synod  rejected  the 
view  according  to  which  the  ministerial  office  is 
derived  from  the  invisible  church,  that  it  is  orig- 
inally vested  in  the  individual  members  of  the 
same  in  their  spiritual  priesthood,  and  by  them 
conferred  upon  the  ministers  of  the  Church 
through  tlieir  vocation  to  the  Holy  off.ce.  The 
Iowa  Synod  agreed  with  Missouri  in  so  far  as 
it  taught  that  the  holy  office  was  originally  and 
directly  given  by  God  to  the  Church,  but  differed 
from  Missouri  in  so  far  as  it  maintained  that  the 
office  was  given  to  the  Church  in  its  totality,  not  to 
its  single  members,  and  that  the  Church  possessed 
the  office  in  and  with  the  means  of  grace,  not  in 
the  spiritual  priesthood  and  in  the  state  of  grace  of 
its  true  members.  And  if  the  conferring  of  the 
office  takes  place  in  accordance  with  a  regular  call 
by  a  single  congregation,  it  is  not  on  account  of 
the  true  members  of  the  invisible  Church  that  may 
be  hidden  in  it,  but  because  the  Church,  which  in 
its  totality  possesses  the  office  and  which  is  as  well 
invisible  communion  of  the  Spirit  as  visible  comi- 
munion  of  the  means  of  grace,  is  in  its  totality 
and  essence  existing  even  in  the  smallest  indi- 
vidual congregation,  where  two  or  three  are  gath- 
ered together  in  the  name  of  Jesus.  The  prin- 
cipal interest  which  the  Iowa  Synod  had  in  this 
controversy  was,    however,    to    assert   the  princi- 


70  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND    USAGES 

plc  that  it  is  sufficient  for  cliurch-unity  to  agree 
in  the  doctrine  of  the  Confession  that  the  office 
was  given  to  the  Church,  not  to  single  persons, 
and  that  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  farther 
theological  exposition  of  this  doctrine  did  not  de- 
stroy the  unity  of  faith  and  confession,  and  that  it, 
therefore,  must  not  stand  in  the  way  of  a  mutual 
recognition  as  brethren  in  the  faith.  This  is  the 
position  of  the  Synod  in  the  controversy  concerning 
the  holy  office.  It  is  evident  at  a  glance  that  this 
is  merely  the  consequence  of  its  attitude  to  the  Con- 
fessions. 

3.  Quite  a  similar  position  the  Synod  has  taken 
concerning  the  doctrine  of  the  millennium.  This 
controversy  also  was  forced  upon  it  from  outside. 
When  Chiliasm,  which  had  formerely  been  tole- 
rated by  the  Missouri  Synod,  was  prescribed  by  it, 
and  the  Rev.  Schieferdecker  expelled,  the  latter 
applied  to  the  Iowa  Synod,  and  asked  whether 
they  considered  him  a  heretic,  who  must  be  denied 
church-fellowship  on  account  of  his  view  of  the 
Millennium.  As  the  Synod,  according  to  its  con- 
fessional standpoint,  answered  this  question  nega- 
tively, it  was  accused  of  holding  an  un-Lutheran 
view  with  regard  to  the  Millennium.  This  com- 
pelled the  Synod  to  defend  its  position  on  this 
question,  and  to  explain  the  kind  of  eschatological 
opinions  or  doctrines  for  which  it  claimed  the 
toleration  of  the  Church.  It  protested  against  the 
insinuation  that  this  presentation  of  the  doctrines 


OF   THE   GKRMAN   IOWA   SYNOD.  71 

of  the  conversion  of  Israel,  of  Antichrist,  and  his 
destruction  at  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  of  the 
Millennium  and  the  first  resurrection,  were  a  synod- 
ical  confession^  and  that  consequently,  Chiliasm 
was  made  a  synodical  dogma.  Only  what  the  Con- 
fessions state  of  the  Last  Things  it  wanted  to  be 
considered  as  its  own  confession.  Accordingly  it 
rejected  every  view  of  the  Millennium  by  which 
the  spiritual  kingdom  of  God  during  that  period 
would  be  made  an  outward  worldly  kingdom,  and 
in  which  the  Church  would  not  be  essentially  and 
principally  a  communion  of  faith;  in  general — 
every  view  according  to  which  there  would  be  an 
other  way  of  salvation  in  that  period  than  in  the 
present.  On  the  other  hand.  Synod  declared  that 
it  could  not  reject  the  doctrines  mentioned  above, 
concerning  the  conversion  of  Israel,  etc.,  as  here- 
sies which  would  destroy  church-fellowship,  as  long 
as  they  were  free  from  the  characteristics  of  a  fanat- 
ical view  of  Chiliasm  as  given  in  the  Symbols.  So 
long  as  such  fanatical  views  were  not  entertained, 
it  declared  there  was  room  in  the  Synod  for  these 
opinions  as  well  as  for  the  opposing  antichiliastic 
ones,  and  in  such  difference  of  opinion  it  could  not 
see  a  prejudice  to  the  necessary  unity  of  faith.  Its 
reason  for  taking  this  position  was,  that  in  this 
case  the  point  in  question  was  not  the  dogma,  but 
theological  problems  in  regard  to  which,  notwith- 
standing the  fullest  harmony  in  the  Confessions, 
there  may  be  a  difference  of  opinion.     On  account 


72  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINKS    AND   USAGES 

of  such  diiTercnces,  cliurcli-fellowship  which  rests 
only  upon  the  Confession  itself,  must  not  be 
denied. 

4.  The  doctrines  of  the  conversion  of  Israel,  the 
Millennium  and  the  first  resurrection,  are  not  re- 
ferred in  any  of  the  symbolical  statements.  But 
the  Antichrist  is  spoken  of  at  different  places,  and 
the  Smalcald  Articles  declare,  not  only  occasionally 
but  directly,  that  the  Pope  is  the  true  A^itichrist. 
The  Iowa  Synod  has,  therefore,  been  claimed  as 
being-  in  direct  opposition  to  the  Confession,  because 
it  does  not  see  the  Antichrist  solely  and  exclusively 
in  the  Pope,  but  declares  the  opinion  may  be  toler- 
ated in  the  Church  according  to  which  a  personal 
Antichrist  is  expected  in  the  Last  Times.  But  also 
on  this  question  the  Iowa  Synod  fully  accepts  all  the 
declarations  of  the  Confessions.  They  do,  however, 
not  teach  that  the  Antichrist  is  solely  and  exclus- 
ively the  Pope.  The  Confessions  do  not  teach  that 
the  Antichrist  is  the  Pope,  but  that  the  Pope  is  the 
Antichrist;  and  far  from  seeing  the  Antichrist  ex- 
clusively in  the  Pope,  they  rather  state  at  another 
place  that  Popery  is  ^part  of  the  Antichrist's  king- 
dom. The  statement  that  popery  is  an  entire  sub- 
version of  Christianity,  consequently  Antichristen- 
dom  as  prophesied  in  Holy  Scripture,  is  indeed 
just  as  much  a  part  of  the  confession  of  faith 
as  the  rejection  of  false  doctrine.  But  the 
questions  whether  Antichrist  be  a  collective 
term  only  or  also  an  individual  person — whether 


OF   THE   GERMAN    IOWA   SYNOD.  73 

the  prophecy  concerning  the  same  be  wholly 
fulfilled  or  whether  some  future  fulfillment  is 
yet  to  be  expected — are  exegetical  problems  which 
have  not  been  considered  by  the  Confessions. 
The  Iowa  Synod  therefore  does  not  in  the  least 
disagree  with  the  Confession,  when  on  the  one  hand 
it  accepts  all  the  assertions  of  the  Confessions  cov- 
ering the  antichristian  character  of  Popery,  and 
on  the  other  hand  regards  the  questions  mentioned 
above  as  open  ones,  without  a  confessional  char- 
acter, and  therefore  without  affecting  the  unity  of 
the  Church,  tolerates  the  opinion  that  Anti-christ 
is  yet  to  be  expected,  along  with  that  that  the 
Roman  Pontiff  is  exclusively  Antichrist. 

5.  The  position  which  the  Iowa  Synod  has  taken 
in  these  controverted  questions  is  only  the  natural 
consequence  of  the  principle,  which  even  without 
regard  to  its  special  application  it  professes  in 
general:  i.  e.  the  recognizing  of  open  questions. 
The  more  earnestly  it  eniphazises,  over  against 
unionism,  the  necessity  for  church-unity  of  agree- 
ment in  the  doctrine,  and  declares  it  to  be  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  church-fellowship,  the  more 
earnest  are  also  its  endeavors  to  avoid  sectarian 
exaggeration.  The  Augsburg  Confession  declares  ; 
*'To  the  true  unity  of  the  Church  it  is  enough 
to  agree  concerning  the  doctrine  of  the  Gos- 
pel and  the  administration  of  the  sacraments," 
that  is,  to  agree  in  the  doctrine  of  salvation  and 
of  faith.      Herein  is  implied  the  further  declaration 


74  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

that  an  agreement  must,  not  necessarily  exist  in 
such  doctrines  which  are  not  doctrines  of  faith. 
The  Iowa  Synod  accordingly  declares  that  for 
church-fellowship  there  must  be  required  7io  abso- 
lute agreement  in  doctrine,  but  only  an  agreement 
in  the  doctrine  of  faith;  but  this  indeed  in  the  whole 
doctrine  of  faith,  and  in  all  its  articles.  This  doc- 
trine of  faith  forms  the  contents  of  the  Confessions, 
and  consequently  the  sum  total  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  Confessions  is  the  indispensable  extent  of  agree- 
ment in  doctrine.  There  must  however  not  be  in- 
ferred from  this,  that  these  doctrines  are  indispen- 
sable and  binding  doctrines  of  faith  because  they 
are  found  in  the  Symbols  of  the  Church,  and 
that  the  decision  of  the  Church  which  is  expressed 
by  the  Symbols  gives  them  the  value  and  validity  of 
divinely  certain  and  binding  doctrines  of  salvation. 
On  the  contrary,  the  Church  has  laid  them  down 
in  its  Confessions  only  because  they  are  the  doc- 
trines of  Scripture,  on  which  saving  faith  depends. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Iowa  Synod  rejects  the 
opinion  that  an  agreement  also  in  such  doctrines 
of  Scripture  which  are  no  doctrines  of  faith  be 
conditio  sine  qna  nan  of  church-fellowship,  and  that 
church-fellowship  must  be  dissolved  on  their  ac- 
count. If  there  be  agreement,  in  all  other  respects, 
in  the  doctrine  of  the  Confessions,  and  there  only 
remains  a  difference  in  other  points,  the  Synod 
will  tolerate  this  and  regard  them  as  open  questions. 
This  does  not  mean  that  we  should  not  strive  for 


OF   THE   GERMAN    IOWA   SYNOD.  75 

agreement  even  in  such  doctrines  as  e.  g.  Ueberira- 
gMugslehre^  conversion  of  Israel,  Antichrist,  etc.,  or 
that  theological  controversies  concerning  tl)em  are 
useless  and  harmful.  Neither  are  they,  by  styling 
tliem  open  questions,  declared  to  be  doubtful 
and  uncertain  doctrines,  concerning  which  a  def- 
inite and  certain  persuasion  cannot  be  attained, 
and  by  no  means  does  this  import  that  they  could 
arbitrarily  be  adopted  or  rejected.  But  this  only 
is  the  meaning  of  that  expression,  that  these 
doctrines,  on  which  there  is  in  fact  a  diversity  of 
opinion  even  among  those  who  fully  agree  in 
the  Confessions,  must  not  be  regarded  as  cJnircJi- 
dividing^  and  that  a  difference  of  their  concep- 
tion can  be  allowed,  because  they  are  no  doc- 
trines of  faith,  and  there  can  be  from  their  very 
nature  no  certainty  of  faith  concerning  them,  as 
they  are  also  not  taught  in  Scripture  as  clearly  and 
distinctly  as  the  doctrine  of  faith.  The  Iowa 
Synod  has  mainly  been  induced  to  hold  this  posi- 
tion by  the  earnest  desire  to  prevent  the  doctri- 
nal and  confessional  basis  of  the  Ltitheran  Church 
from  being  rendered  doubtful  in  its  divine  certainty 
by  having  mixed  with  it  merely  theological  views 
and  opinions,  and  from  having  destroyed  thereby 
its  fundamental  character,  according  to  w^hich  it 
forms  or  dissolves  church-fellowship. 

6.  Whilst  the  Iowa  Synod  will  not  suffer  any- 
thing to  be  added  to  this  basis,  it  objects  also  to 
having  anything  taken  away,  and  will  not  allow 


76  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND    USAGES 

any  doctrine  of  the  Confessions  to  be  made  an 
open  qnestion.  On  account  of  this  position  the 
Synod  was  moved  to  take  the  stand  which  it  has 
held  in  the  Predesiinarian  controversy.  Soon  after 
the  Missourian  Predestinatianism  had  appeared  for 
the  first  time  in  1868,  the  Iowa  Synod  opposed  it 
and  repudiated  it  as  a  deviation  from  the  doctrine 
of  the  Confessions.  The  Synod  was  well  aware 
even  in  the  doctrine  of  Predestination  that  there 
were  points  which  must  be  considered  open  ques- 
tions, as  e.  g.  the  distinction  made  between  election 
in  its  wider  or  stricter  sense,  as  well  as  between 
voluntas  antecedens  and  conseqiiens^  the  teaching 
that  election  has  taken  place  intuitu fidei^  implying 
that  faith  is  the  condition  or  the  instrumental  or  the 
subordinate  impulsive  cause  of  election,  etc.  But 
from  the  very  beginning  Predestinarianism  was  pro- 
nounced by  the  Synod  to  be  apostasy  from  the 
Confessions  and  a  church-dividing  error.  The 
Iowa  Synod  by  no  means  holds  that  predestination 
signifies  only  the  general  decree  to  save  all  men 
through  faith  in  Christ,  which  God  eternally  has 
decreed,  but  it  teaches  that  it  really  is  an  individ- 
teal  Predestination,  and  if  a  man  is  saved,  it  avows 
this  to  be  the  effect  of  this  decree  on  him,  and  the 
cause  thereof  to  be  no  other  than  this  eternal,  ef- 
fective, gracious  will  of  God,  and  in  no  way  man's 
own  will,  self-determination  and  merit.  But  it 
condemns  the  doctrine  that  Predestination  of  indi- 
viduals or  election  is  a  decree  essentially  different 


OF  THE  GERMAN  IOWA  SYNOD.        77 

fro7n  the  universal  decree  of  grace  whicli  God  lias 
decreed  oiitside  of  and  aside  of  and  in  addition  to 
the  universal  one,  so  that  there  be  found  in  God  a 
contradictingr  will,  a  universal  one  and  one  not  uni- 
versal. Over  ao-ainst  this  it  maintains  that  indi- 
vidual  predestination  has  taken  place  within  the 
universal  decree  of  God,  is  contained  in  it,  and  no 
other  zvill  than  this  same  universal  decree  itself, 
however  with  a  special  reference^  namely,  inasmuch 
as  it  refers  to  the  children  of  God  in  special,  as 
they  are  known  by  God  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world.  It  prefers  that  mode  of  teaching,  which 
represents  predestination  as  the  applying  of  the  uni- 
versal decree  to  the  individual,  in  whom  the  same 
becomes  realized,  which  works  his  salvation  and 
everything  thereto  pertaining,  consequently  also 
the  saving  faith,  and  prefers  it  because  by  this 
mode  also  the  comforting  power  of  predestination  is 
rendered  prominent.  It  allows  however  also  the 
other  mode  of  teaching,  w^hich  takes  predestination 
in  its  narrower  sense,  strictly  as  the  election  of  a 
definite  number  of  certain  men  from  the  great  mass 
of  reprobates,  if  there  be  also  taught  that  Predesti- 
nation in  this  sense  has  taken  place  intuitu  fidei. 
The  Synod  however  rejects  the  opinion  that  dis- 
criminatinof  selection  of  some  before  others  has  been 
made  without  regard  to  man's  conduct,  merely  ac- 
cording to  the  pleasure  of  the  will  of  God,  and  holds 
that  this  can  be  asserted  of  Predestination  only 
when  it  is  taken  in  accordance  with  the  mode  of 


78  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

teaching  mentioned  in  the  first  place,  as  the  uni- 
versal decree  referring  and  applied  to  individuals. 
And  whilst  it  asserts  Predestination  in  the  latter 
meaning  to  be  the  source  of  our  salvation  as  well  as 
of  our  faith  and  our  persevering  in  the  same,  it  de- 
nies that  predestination  being  taken  merely  as  se- 
lection is  the  cause  of  some  believing  and  others 
abiding  in  unbelief.  It  rejects  the  opinion  that 
even  the  most  obdurate  resistance  of  those  who 
were  ordained  by  this  selection  will  not  hinder  it 
from  making  them  believers  and  save  them,  and 
maintains  that  on  the  contrary  the  obdurate  resist- 
ance of  the  reprobates,  which  God  has  foreknown, 
has  prevented  Him  from  predestinating  them  in 
His  eternal  decree.  It  disowns  the  opinion  that 
the  effect  of  universal  grace  is  indeed  exhibited 
and  manifested  in  the  faith  of  those  who  believe 
for  a  time,  but  that  perseverance  in  faith  is  the 
effect  of  selecting  grace  alone.  And  concerning 
the  appealing  to  the  secret  will  of  God,  the  Iowa 
Synod  unreservedly  recognizes  the  manifold  un- 
searcliable  problems  which  pertain  to  it,  but  denies 
that  the  cause  of  God's  not  having  elected  all  men, 
and  of  His  not  taking  away  the  resistance  even 
from  the  reprobates  is  His  secret  will,  according  to 
which  He  will  not  do  with  them  what  He  does 
with  His  elect,  as  it  is  distinctly  revealed  that  the 
cause  thereof  is  not  in  God,  but  in  the  persever- 
ing self-liardening  of  man.  On  the  other  hand  it 
is  indeed  concealed  in  the  secret  foreknowledge  of 


OK  THE  GERMAN   IOWA   SYNOD. 


79 


God  who  of  those  who  are  called  will  believe,  and 
who  not,  and  who  of  the  converted  will  persevere, 
and  who  will  not.  And  as  God  has  reserved 
these  secrets  for  His  wisdom,  and  has  not  revealed 
them,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Iowa  Synod 
the  elect  can  indeed  be  absolutely  snre  of  their 
election  and  preservation  on  the  part  of  God,  but 
not  on  their  part  of  their  persevering  in  faith,  be- 
cause the  revelation  of  the  decree  of  predestina- 
tion on  which  rests  the  certainty  of  perseverance 
of  the  elect  runs  thus,  that  God  would  support 
His  work  in  them  to  the  end,  1/  they  observe 
God's  Word,  pray  diligently,  abide  in  God's  good- 
ness, and  faithfully  use  the  gifts  received.  This  is 
the  position  the  Iowa  Synod  holds  in  regard  to 
Predestinationism  at  large,  and  in  its  particulars, 
and  in  this  manner  it  has  endeavored  to  enforce 
the  Confessions  as  the  indispensable  foundations 
of  doctrine  also  in  this  special  point  over  against 
Predestinarianism,  which  is  fundamentally  opposed 
to  the  same. 

7.  In  a  different  manner  it  has  pursued  this  aim, 
by  taking  the  position  which  it  holds  in  regard  to 
the  General  Council.  In  consequence  of  its  con- 
fessional principles  it  hailed  with  joy  the  attempt 
to  unite  the  Lutheran  Church  of  our  country  on 
the  basis  of  the  Confessions,  the  zvhole  of  the  Con- 
fessions, and  the  Confessions  alone.  Though  it 
would  have  preferred  a  Free  Conference  as  a  pre- 
liminary step,   yet  it  was  not  averse   to   the   idea 


8o  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

of  founding  a  General  Council,  when  from  another 
quarter  it  was  claimed  that  this  was  complying 
with  a  deep-felt  want  and  that  the  necessary  con- 
ditions therefor  existed.  According  to  its  princi- 
ples of  Confession,  however,  it  could  join  such  a 
General  Body  only  if  the  same  would  recognize 
also  the  Lutheran  Confessions  as  the  Church- 
uniting  and  Church-dividing  basis,  and  repudiate 
mixed  communion  and  exchange  of  pulpits  with 
those  of  another  faith.  Tlie  General  Council, 
however,  was  not  prepared  to  do  this,  and  the 
Iowa  Synod  accordingly  was  compelled  to  defer 
its  full  connection  with  the  same.  It  did,  how- 
ever, not  withdraw  entireh',  but  entered  into  a  re- 
lation to  it  wdiich  has  been  provided  for  by  the 
constitution  of  the  General  Council,  and  by  which 
the  Synod  was  enabled  to  take  part  not  only  with 
its  foreign  missionary,  liturgical  work,  etc.,  but 
also  with  the  debates  on  the  topics  of  mixed  com- 
munion and  exchange  of  pulpits  which  since  that 
time  for  a  number  of  years  took  place  at  the  con- 
ventions of  the  General  Council.  All  the  time  its 
exertions  were  directed  to  demonstrating  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  indispensable  restriction  of  church-fel- 
lowship to  those  who  are  of  the  same  faith  as  is 
implied  in  the  acceptance  of  the  same  Confessions 
and  in  the  holding  of  the  same  confessional  basis. 
The  Synod  was  and  is  persuaded,  that  it  adds 
no  new  condition  of  Church-fellowship  at  all  to 
the  Confessions  but  that  it  merely  asserts  the  in- 


OF    THK    GERMAN    lOV/A    SYNOD.  8l 

evitable  consequence  of  the  same,  wliicli  is  di- 
rectly contained  therein.  For  tlie  participating 
in  the  confessional  act  of  celebrating  the  Lord's 
Supper  is  a  teal  and  vc7y  emphatic  confession^ 
and  the  principle  that  only  those  who  are  of  the 
same  household  of  faith  may  partake  of  it,  whilst 
those  of  another  faith  must  be  excluded,  is  noth- 
ing else  but  the  '' we  believe  and  profess,"  "we 
reject  and  condemn,"  of  the  Confessions  them- 
selves in  their  direct  application  to  ecclesiastical 
practice.  The  Iowa  Synod  was  well  aware  that 
the  bad  custom  of  mixed  communion  and  ex- 
change of  pulpits  which  has  crept  in  would  not  at 
once  everywhere  be  discontinued,  and  that  such 
deviations  from  the  principle  occurring  now  and 
then  within  the  limits  of  the  different  Synods  should 
be  no  reason  against  entering  into  a  closer  union 
with  them.  But  the  acknowledgment  of  the  prin- 
ciple that  church-fellowship — fellowship  in  the 
Lord's  Supper  and  the  pulpit — could  be  claimed 
and  granted  only  on  the  basis  of  unity  in  Confession, 
it  declared  to  be  indispensable,  since  it  pertained  to 
the  necessary  confessional  basis.  On  this  account 
the  different  and  successive  declarations  of  the 
General  Council,  though  the  Iowa  Synod  would 
not  hesitate  to  acknowledge  the  progress  m.ade, 
did  not  suffice,  as  they  rather  dwelt  on  the  pas- 
toral duty  in  regard  to  the  application  of  this  prin- 
ciple and  the  dealing  with  exceptions,  instead  of 
unreservedlv  confessing  this  principle  itself.  Not 
6 


82  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

before  the  clear  and  plaiu  Confession  of  the 
Swedish  Augustana  Synod  concerning  this  ques- 
tion had  been  endorsed  by  the  General  Council  at 
Galesburg,  1875,  and  the  rule:  "Lutheran  pulpits 
for  Lutheran  ministers  only  and  Lutheran  altars 
for  Lutheran  communicants  only,"  had  been  de- 
clared to  be  founded  upon  the  Word  of  God  a?id  the 
Confessions  of  our  Church,  did  the  Iowa  Synod  hold 
that  the  confessional  principle  was  recognized, 
which  at  Fort  Wayne,  1867,  it  had  urged  as  the  in- 
dispensable condition  on  which  the  official  union 
of  Synods  might  be  effected.  This  Galesburg 
rule  was  strongly  opposed  in  different  parts  of  the 
General  Council.  The  proceedings,  however, 
which  took  place  at  the  successive  meetings  of  the 
General  Council,  and  which  were  based  upon  the 
theses  of  the  sainted  Dr.  Krauth,  who  treated  the 
question  of  altar  and  pulpit  fellowvship  with  incom- 
parable clearness,  served  to  foster  the  expectation 
that  this  opposition  would  be  overcome  more  and 
more,  and  the  Galesburg  rule  gain  universal  and 
approved  acceptance.  The  Iowa  Synod  already 
declared  that  it  was  hindered  no  longer  from  organ- 
ically uniting  with  the  General  Council  by  confes- 
sional scruples,  as  at  Galesburg  the  Confessional 
principle,  which  it  considered  to  be  indispensable, 
had  been  adopted.  Since  that  time,  however, 
within  the  General  Council  thiuQrs  seem  to  have 
undergone  a  change.  The  understanding  of 
the    Galesburg  rule,    as    the    official    acknowledg- 


OF   THE   GERMAN    IOWA   SYNOD.  83 

ment  of  the  principle  set  forth  by  the  Iowa 
Synod  at  Fort  Wayne,  has  repeatedly  and  very 
emphatically  been  opposed  by  very  influential 
parties,  and  declined  by  them  in  the  name  of 
the  General  Council.  These  declarations  have, 
indeed,  been  contradicted  just  as  emphatically  by 
other  parties.  But  since  they  have  not  yet  been 
renounced  by  the  General  Council  itself,  the  Iowa 
Synod  is  induced  to  be  more  cautious  in  assertin^^^ 
that  the  necessary  conditions  for  fuM  Church 
union    exist.       It  is    now    waitino-    for   future   de- 

o 

velopmeut  within  the  General  Council,  still  hoping; 
for  a  final  official  declaration  in  favor  of  the  Con- 
fessional principle  of  unmixed  communion  and 
pulpit-fellowship.  Whatever  this  fiual  decision 
may  be — this  principle  is  the  indispensable  con- 
dition of  all  Church  union  for  the  Iowa  Synod,  in 
accordance  with  its  position  to  the  Confessions. 

8.  Similarly  as  regarding  doctrine  and  church- 
fellowship,  the  Confessions  are  also  the  decisive 
norm  of  all  ecclesiastical  orders  and  rites.  In  this 
the  Synod  has  maintained  the  connection  with  the 
older  Lutheran  Church,  and  preserved  ecclesiastical 
tradition,  as  well  as  taken  in  account  the  circum- 
stances of  our  country. 

First  of  all,  the  Synod  is  taking  pains  to  ground 
and  confirm  the  necessary  agreement  in  faith  and 
confession  by  a  thorotigh  insti^uction  in  the  doctrine 
of  the  Church,  to  which  end  it  emphasizes  a  careful 
catechetical  instruction  aside  from  the  sermon.     It 


84  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINHS    AND    USAGES 

urges  not  only  scrupulous  in;  truction  by  pastors 
of  the  catechumens,  but  also  the  fostering  and 
upbuilding  of  those  who  have  been  confirmed.  It 
does  not  neglect  Sunday-schools;  it  desires  simply 
to  have  them  conducted  in  a  strictly  Lutheran 
way.  It  prefers,  however,  the  reliable  and  well- 
approved  Church  examinations  (Christenlehre), 
and  will  not  have  them  ranked  below  the  Sunday- 
school.  It  also  lays  great  stress  on  the  establish- 
m.ent  of  parochial  schools,  and  insists  on  her  mem- 
bers sending  their  children  to  the  same  up  to  the 
time  of  their  confirmation,  as  a  conscientious  duty. 
Where  congregations  are  yet  too  small  to  support 
parochial  teachers,  the  ministers  give  instruction  in 
these  schools,  where  special  attention  is  paid  to 
religious  instruction.  It  does  not  take  this  course 
in  opposition  to  the  public  schools.  These  are 
rather  considered  a  great  blessing  for  our  civil  life 
and  an  indispensable  institution  of  our  country, 
which  must  vigorously  be  supported  against  Rom- 
ish assaults.  But  since  the  baptism  of  infants 
comprises  the  obligation  of  an  education  in  the 
faith,  and  the  Sunday-school  instruction  is  not 
sufiicient  for  this  purpose,  Lutheran  parents  can 
make  use  of  schools  where  religion  cannot  be 
taught  for  their  baptized  children  only  when  the 
instruction  required  by  baptism  has  been  brought 
to  a  close  in  confirmation. 

Also,  in  respect  to  the  order  of  service  and  min- 
isterial acts,  the  Synod  strives  to  sustain  the  con- 


OF   THE   GERMAN    IOWA    SYKOD  85 

nection  with  the  Old  Church  and  her  liturgical 
usages,  considering,  however,  at  the  same  time, 
the  circumstances  and  wants  of  the  time  present. 
From  the  very  beginning  Loelie's  Agenda  has  been 
used  in  her  congregations,  whose  liturgy  is  es- 
sentially the  same  as  that  of  the  Church  book  of 
the  General  Council,  w^ith  whose  liturgical  princi- 
ples it  is  in  perfect  harmony.  This  liturgical  form 
is  regarded  the  ideal  to  which  the  congregations 
ought  to  be  brought  up,  but  the  Synod  claims 
no  govermental  powers  towards  introducing  it,  and 
will  sooner  bear  diversity  in  this  respect  than  in- 
jure the  liturgical  liberty  of  the  individual  congre- 
gations, contrary  to  the  Confessions  of  the  Church. 
On  this  account  it  also  does  not  insist  upon  the 
establishment  of  Private  Confession  under  all  cir- 
cumstances but  where  it  cannot  be  established,  it 
only  persists  the  more  strenuously  on  personally 
giving  notice  of  one's  intention  to  partake  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  that  the  examination  may  take 
place  of  which  the  Confession  speaks. 

Its  sy nodical  and  congregational  organization^ 
lastly,  is  based  upon  the  Symbolical  fundamental 
principle  that  all  ecclesiastical  power  be  given  to 
the  Church  principally  and  immediately,  as  the 
same  is  ecclesiastically  represented  even  in  the 
smallest  local  church.  It  therefore  acknow^ledges 
no  other  governmental  powers  of  the  Synod, 
but  that  which  has  been  conferred  upon  the  same 
by  the  individual  congregations,  and  it  assumes  not 


86  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

more  than  advisory  power  in  regard  to  congrega- 
tional affairs.  The  oversight  of  its  congrega- 
tions and  pastors,  with  which  it  is  intrusted, 
is  put  in  practice  among  other  things  by  visita- 
tions, which  regularly  take  place  biennially.  It 
strenuously  enforces  what  is  j'tiris  divini  in  the 
church  order.  It  rejects  the  license  system,  the 
calling  for  a  certain  time,  etc.,  and  acknowledges 
but  a  regular  call  by  election  on  the  part  of  the 
congregation  (the  president  of  the  synod  either  pro- 
posing for  election  or  ratifying  the  same)  and  by  or- 
dination and  installation  on  the  part  of  Synod. 
The  annual  conventions  of  its  District  Synods  are 
composed  of  the  pastors  as  the  representatives  of 
the  Ministerium  and  of  one  lay  delegate  for  every 
Synodical  congregation  as  representatives  of  the 
same.  To  tlie  conventions  of  the  General  Synod, 
which  occur  every  three  or  four  years,  five  minis- 
ters and  five  congregations  send  one  representative 
respectively.  A  standing  committee  or  "Synodal 
Ausschuss "  represents  the  entire  Synod  during 
the  time  intervening  between  its  conventions. 


THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL 

BY 

REV.  PROF.  H.  E.  JACOBS,  D.  D.,  LL.  D. 


THE  General  Council  makes  no  claim  of  com- 
prising within  itself  all  truly  Lutheran  Synods 
and  churches  in  America.  Nor,  if  we  under- 
stand it,  does  it  have  any  such  aim.  There 
is  no  such  thing  as  a  "General  Council  Lutheran 
Church."  There  may  be  those  who  have  regarded 
it  as  destined  to  supplant  or  merge  \vithin  itself  all 
other  general  bodies,  but  we  are  sure  that  this  is 
not  its  spirit.  Its  great  purpose  is  the  development 
of  the  Lutheran  Church  of  this  country,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  principles  of  Confessional  and  His- 
torical Lutheranism.  It  affords  the  means  whereby 
any  number  of  Synods  that  have  been  brought  to  a 
real  understanding  and  a  hearty  appreciation  of 
each  other's  position,  as  true  and  consistent  ad- 
herents of  the  faith  confessed  at  Augsburg,  may 
cooperate  harmoniously,  until  the  time  come  for  a 
wider  and  more  general  union.  It  is  pledged  to  the 
maintenance  of  distinctive  Lutheranism.     Whether 

(87) 


88  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES    AND   USAGES 

this  require  the  permanence  of  any  one  particular 
organization,  call  it  General  Council,  or  General 
Synod,  or  Synodical  Conference,  or  anything  else, 
is  a  matter  of  relative  indifference.  It  makes  no 
war,  therefore,  upon  any  other  general  body,  anx- 
ious though  it  is  that  all  who  confess  the  same 
faith  should  recognize  and  cooperate  with  one  an- 
other. It  seeks  to  interfere  with  the  work  of  no 
Synods  or  congregations  or  individuals  claiming  to 
be  Lutheran,  but  not  choosing  to  unite  with  it. 
It  simply  demands  that  its  own  work  shall  be  ac- 
corded similar  respect ;  and  that  all  who  claim 
recognition  as  Lutherans  do  no  injury  to  the  com- 
mon cause  by  betraying  well-established  Lutheran 
principles.  It  has  embodied  its  entire  conception 
of  the  nature,  modes,  conditions  and  obligations  of 
Church  organization  in  most  clear  and  explicit 
terms  in  its  "Fundamental  Principles  of  Faith  and 
Church  Polity."  A  statement  of  these  "Funda- 
mental Principles,"  with  a  brief  exposition  of  their 
meaning,  will  afford  the  best  means  of  understand- 
ing the  General  Council's  position.  "The  Princi- 
ples of  Faith  "  are: 

"I.  There  unist  be  and  abide  through  all  time,  one  Holy 
Christian  Church,  which  is  the  assembly  of  all  believers,  among 
whom  the  Gospel  is  purely  preached,  and  the  Holy  Sacra- 
ments administered,  as  the  Gospel  demands. 

"To  the  true  unity  of  the  Church,  it  is  sufficient  that  there 
he  agreement  touching  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel,  that  it  be 
preached  in  one  accord  in  its  pure  sense,  and  that  the  sacra- 
ments be  administered  conformably  to  God's  Word." 


OF  THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL.         89 

This  is  Article  VII  of  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
as  it  reads  in  the  German  text.  It  affords  the  defi- 
nition of  the  Church,  as  properly  speaking,  not  an 
external,  visible  body,  but  the  sum  total  of  all  be- 
lievers, whoever  and  wherever  they  be,  "  the  Com- 
munion of  Saints,"  as  the  Apostles'  Creed  con- 
fesses, or  as  Luther,  in  the  Smalcald  Articles  de- 
clares: '^  Thank  God,  to-day  a  child  seven  years 
old  knows  what  the  Church  is,  viz:  saints,  be- 
lievers and  lambs,  who  hear  the  voice  of  their 
Shepherd;"  or  Melanchthon  in  the  Apology: 
*'This  Church  exists,  viz:  the  truly  believing  and 
righteous  men  scattered  throughout  the  whole 
world." 

It  gives  the  marks  of  the  Church  as  "  the  pure 
preaching  of  the  Word,  and  the  right  adminis- 
tration of  the  sacraments."  For  wherever  there  is 
true  faith  there  must  be  also  a  confession  of  this 
faith;  and  conversely,  wherever  God  gives  his 
Word,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  ever  active  and  begets  a 
true  people  of  God.  God's  Word  can  never  be 
without  God's  people,  or  God's  people  without 
God's  Word.  While  the  Church  properly  speak- 
ing is  not  visible,  and  no  one  can  draw  the  line 
dividing  precisely  the  believing  from  the  unbeliev- 
ing, nevertheless,  wherever  these  marks  appear,  we 
are  sure  that  the  Church  is  present,  even  though 
man\^  externally  connected  with  it  be  hypocrites. 
The  purity  of  the  preaching  also  has  its  degrees. 
As   the  Word  of  God   is  always  efficacious,  even 


90  DISTINCTIVK   DOCTRINES   AND    USAGKS 

when  accompanied  by  error,  it  is  impossible  to  de- 
termine the  extent  to  which  such  purity  may  be 
only  relative  where  a  Church  really  exists.  The 
purer  the  preaching  of  the  Word  and  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  sacraments,  the  purer  the  Church, 
the  firmer  its  foundations,  the  more  faithful  its 
testimony,  and  the  more  efficacious  its  work. 

If  the  Church,  therefore,  be  properly  the  true 
people  of  God,  the  unity  of  the  Church  consists  in 
the  bond  of  common  faith  in  Christ,  which,  by 
uniting  them  with  Him,  unites  them  also  with 
one  another.  This  unity  is  promoted  by  all  that 
strengthens  faith  in  Christ  and  His  word.  It  is 
retarded  by  all  that  weakens  such  faith,  or  recedes 
from  the  Gospel.  The  external  expression  of  this 
unity  consists  neither  in  external  organization, 
whether  under  a  hierarchy,  as  the  Papacy,  or  in  a 
confederacy  of  denominations — or  Synods;  nor  in 
the  use  of  identical  ceremonies  or  forms  of  worship, 
however  serviceable  this  may  be  in  promoting  good 
order  and  a  common  understanding.  "Agreement 
touching  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel,"  which  in- 
cludes the  right  administration  of  the  sacraments, 
is  the  prime  requisite  of  Church  unity  and  Church 
union.  For  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  we  hear 
Christ's  voice,  and  as  every  one  follows  that  voice, 
one  impulse  from  one  Spirit  influences  the  entire 
body,  and  even  without  knowing  or  hearing  of  one 
another,  "they  speak  the  same  thing,"  and  are 
"perfectly  joined  together  in  the  same  mind  and  in 
the  same  judgment."     (i  Cor.  i.  lo). 


OF  THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL.         9I 

"  IL  Tlie  true  unity  of  a  particular  Church,  in  virtue  of  which 
men  are  truly  iiieuibers  of  one  and  the  same  Church,  and  by 
which  any  Church  abides  in  re*al  identity,  and  is  entitled  to  a 
continuation  of  her  name,  is  unity  in  doctrine  and  faith  and  in 
the  sacraments." 

A  distinction  between  a  universal  and  a  particu- 
lar Church  is  here  afBrmed.  Different  degrees  of 
purity  in  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  and  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments,  different  degrees  of 
accuracy  in  defining  the  doctrines  of  God's  Word 
and  expressing  the  contents  of  the  one  common 
faith,  the  exaltation  of  adiaphora  into  matters  of 
essential  importance,  the  depreciation  of  matters  of 
essential  importance  into  adiaphora,  the  determin- 
ation of  forms  of  Church  government  as  indispen- 
sable conditions  of  Church  unity,  even  the  limita- 
tions determined  by  national  or  linguistic  lines, 
explain  the  division  of  the  Church  universal  into 
particular  churches.  But  whatever  be  the  prin- 
ciple according  to  which  the  separate  existence  of 
any  particular  Church  has  been  established,  what 
is  true  of  the  Church  Universal  is  true  also  of  all 
its  parts.  Its  unity  is  a  "unity  in  doctrine  and 
faith  and  in  the  sacraments."  This  is  further 
explained: 

"  That  she  continues  to  teach  and  to  set  forth,  and  that  her 
true  members  embrace  from  the  heart,  and  use,  the  articles  of 
faith  and  the  sacraments,  as  they  were  held  and  administered 
when  the  Church  came  into  distinctive  being  and  received  a 
distinctive  name." 

When  she  teaches  otherwise  than   they  taught 


92  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND    USAGES 

who  were  her  historical  ancestors,  she  has  broken 
her  unity  with  them,  and  is  no  longer  the  same 
Church,  no  difference  though  the  name  be  re- 
tained, or  however  preponderant  on  her  side  may 
be  numerical  majorities.  If  every  member  would 
agree  to  a  change  in  her  Creed,  this  would  not 
change  the  testimony  of  the  communion  which 
was  fixed  at  its  organization.  It  would  only  show 
that  the  historical  successor  was  a  different 
Church.  The  Roman  Catholic  Church  cannot 
amend  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  so  as  to 
remove  elements  on  which  the  Tridentine  fathers 
insisted,  or  to  include  Protestant  conceptions  of 
doctrine,  without  thereby  ceasing  to  be  the  same 
Church  as  that  which  for  three  centuries  and  a 
half  has  recognized  those  decrees  as  the  standard 
of  teaching,  and  excluded  from  the  hope  of  salva- 
tion all  who  disputed  their  authorit)'.  Every  par- 
ticular Church  stands  for  a  particular  statement  or 
type  of  doctrine;  and  the  life  of  that  particular 
Church  is  maintained  or  perishes,  as  the  statement 
or  type  of  doctrine  of  that  particular  Church  is 
maintained  or  surrendered. 

"III.  The  unity  of  the  Church  is  intrusted  to,  and  made 
manifest  in  the  solemn,  public  and  official  Confessions,  which 
are  set  forth,  to  wit:  The  generic  unity  of  the  Christian  Church 
in  the  general  Creeds,  and  the  specific  unity  of  pure  parts  of  the 
Christian  Church  in  their  specific  Creeds:  one  chief  object  of 
both  classes  of  which  Creeds  is,  that  Christians  who  are  in  the 
unity  of  faith  may  know  each  other  as  such,  and  may  have  a 
visible  bond  of  fellowship." 


OF  THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL.         93 

"  IV.  That  Confessions  may  be  such  a  testimony  of  unity, 
and  bond  of  union,  they  must  be  accepted  in  every  statement 
of  doctrine,  in  their  own  true,  native,  original  and  only  sense. 
Those  who  set  them  forth  and  use  them,  must  not  only  agree 
to  use  the  same  words,  but  must  use  and  understand  these 
words  in  one  and  the  same  sense." 

The  Confessions,  as  visible  bonds  of  fellowship, 
are  articles  of  agreement  among  those  who  sub- 
scribe them.  Like  all  other  contracts,  to  be  of  any 
value,  they  must  be  expressed  in  clear  and  unam- 
biguous terms.  A  contract  that  is  capable  of  being 
understood  in  two  or  more  senses  by  the  parties 
who  subscribe  it,  is  utterly  worthless,  and  need  not 
be  signed,  so  far  as  any  value  either  party  to  the 
contract  derives  from  it.  An  article  of  agreement, 
whether  in  Civil  Law  or  in  Church  Organization, 
reaches  its  end  only  when  both  parties  understand 
its  terms  "in  one  and  the  same  sense."  To  ask 
men  to  sign  a  document,  with  the  understanding 
that  the  meaning  intended  to  be  conveyed  by  those 
who  framed  it  need  not  be  accepted,  but  that  every 
one  is  free  to  attach  to  it  his  own  interpretation,  is 
an  attempt  to  defeat  the  very  end  for  which  the 
document  was  framed.  It  is  equivalent  to  using 
bushels  of  varying  capacities,  or  yard-sticks  of 
different  lengths.  The  famous  Tract  XCL,  by  the 
late  Cardinal  Newman,  was  an  effort  to  show  how 
men  could  subscribe  the  XXXIX  Articles  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  put  upon  them  a  Roman- 
izing interpretation,  i.  <?.,  remain  in  the  Church  of 
England  while  being  at  heart  Romanists.     The 


94  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

effort  is  here  made  to  prevent  any  such  procedure 
in  the  churches  uniting  in  the  General  Council. 
It  is  not  subscription  to  Confessions  of  faith  that  is 
desired,  so  much  as  to  the  faith  of  the  Confessions. 
The  unity  of  the  Church  does  not  consist  in  sub- 
scription to  the  same  Confessions,  but  in  the  accept- 
ance and  teaching  of  the  same  doctrines.  Where 
the  doctrines  of  the  Confessions  are  not  believed,  it 
is  the  solemn  duty  of  the  person  who  questions 
them  to  testify  on  all  occasions  against  them,  in- 
stead of  seeking  to  hide  his  dissent  under  an  am- 
biguous or  indefinite  formula.  The  right  of  private 
judgment  must  be  constantly  guaranteed;  but  this 
right  demands  that  Confessions  shall  be  subscribed 
only  after  they  have  been  tested  by  the  study  of 
the  Holy  Scripture,  and  their  entire  Scriptural 
character  has  been  determined.  In  other  words, 
"that  Confessions  be  a  bond  of  union,"  they  must 
be  recognized  as  the  expressions  of  an  agreement 
that  is  deeper  and  firmer  than  that  of  the  mere 
document  that  is  recoijnized  and  subscribed. 

"V.  The  unity  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  as  a 
portion  of  the  Holy  Christian  Church,  depends  upon  her 
abiding  in  one  and  the  same  faith,  in  confessing  which  she  ob- 
tained her  distinctive  name,  her  political  recognition,  and  her 
history." 

Thus  it  is  explicitly  declared,  that  the  Evan- 
gelical Lutheran  Church  does  not  contain  all 
Christians,  but  is  only  a  portion  of  the  Holy 
Christian  Church.     We  know  of  no    one    in    the 


OF  THE  GENERAI.  COUNCIL.         95 

General  Council  who  has  ever  taught  otherwise. 
Should  there,  however,  at  any  time  be  such  a  one 
among  us,  his  teaching  would  directly  contradict  a 
principle,  which  the  General  Council  requires 
every  Synod  uniting  with  it  to  adopt. 

But  where  the  faith  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
is  amended  or  modified,  while  the  bounds  of  the 
Holy  Christian  Church  may  not  be  transcended, 
the  unity  of  Lutheranism  is  undoubtedly  broken. 
If  the  faith  be  not  the  same  faith  which  gave  the 
Lutheran  Church  its  distinctive  position,  just  in  so 
far  there  is  no  unity  with  the  Lutheran  Church. 
However  high  the  position  which  a  teacher  may 
be  accorded  within  what  calls  itself  the  Lutheran 
Church,  if  he  hold  and  teach  e.  g.  that  original  sin 
is  not  truly  sin,  or  that  Christ  has  not  made  a 
sacrifice  for  all  the  sins  of  men,  or  that  some 
merit  is  connected  with  human  preparations  for 
God's  grace,  or  that  the  Holy  Spirit  does  not  ordi- 
narily w^ork  through  the  Word  and  sacraments,  or 
that  faith  is  sometimes  without  good  works,  or  that 
some  other  requirements  besides  agreement  con- 
cerning the  Gospel  and  sacraments  are  necessary 
to  the  unity  of  the  Church,  or  that  no  grace  is 
offered  in  Baptism,  or  that  there  is  no  real  presence 
in  the  Holy  Supper,  etc.,  he  has  broken  the  unity 
of  the  Lutheran  Church.  If  all  our  general  bodies, 
viz..  General  Synod,  General  Council,  Synodical 
Conference,  United  Synod,  Ohio,  Iowa,  Norwegian 
Conference,  etc.,  were  to  unite  in  a  unanimous  re- 


96  DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

jection  of  some  distinctive  feature  of  the  Lutheran 
Church  of  the  Reformation  period,  they  could  not 
change  the  faith  and  confession  of  the  IvUtheran 
Church,  but  would  simply  demonstrate  that  in 
such  action  these  bodies  were  no  longer  IvUtheran, 
but  had  broken  with  the  unity  of  the  Lutheran 
Church.  The  unity  of  the  Lutheran,  as  a  particu- 
lar Church,  is  found  only  in  consistent  adherence 
to  her  historical  position,  and  in  progress  on  the 
lines  of  her  historical  development. 

"  VI.  The  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession  is  by  preeminence 
the  Confession  of  that  faith.  The  acceptance  of  its  doctrines 
and  the  avowal  of  them  without  equivocation  or  mental  reser- 
vation, make,  mark  and  identify  that  Church  which  alone  in 
the  true,  original,  historical  aiid  honest  sense  of  the  term  is  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church." 

It  is  well  to  notice  that  it  is  not  the  acceptance 
of  the  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession,  but  the  ac- 
ceptance of  its  doctrines^  which  determines  the 
Lutheran  character  of  a  teacher  or  Church  body. 
A  man  who  has  never  subscribed  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  or  even  never  seen  it,  is  a  Lutheran, 
if  he  teach  the  doctrines  which  it  maintains.  A 
man  who  makes  his  subscription  to  the  Confession 
an  object  of  especial  boast,  is  no  Lutheran,  if  "by 
equivocation  or  mental  reservation,"  or  even  by 
excusable  misunderstanding,  he  depart  from  any  of 
the  doctrines  therein  clearly  and  professedly  taught. 
He  may  hold  or  not  hold  to  additional  confessions; 
he  may  see  or  may  deny  their  importance.     The 


OF   THK   GENKRAL   COUNCIL.  97 

question  ns  to  whether  he  be  a  Lutheran  or  not, 
the  General  Council  affirms,  must  be  decided  from 
his  relation  to  the  doctrines  of  the  unaltered  Augs- 
burg Confession,  and  from  no  other  standard  what- 
ever. ''^  ThQ  doclr7?ies  oi  the  unaltered  Augsburg 
Confession — nothing  more,  nothing  less."  This 
is  all  that  the  General  Council  demands,  as  the 
test  of  what  is  Lutheran.  Hence  its  "principles" 
continue: 

"VII.  Tlie  only  Churches,  therefore,  of  any  land,  which  are 
properly  in  the  unity  of  that  communion,  and  by  consequence 
entitled  to  its  name,  Evangelical  Lutheran,  are  those  which 
sincerely  hold  and  truthfully  confess  the  doctrines  of  the  unal- 
tered Augsburg  Confession. 

"VIII.  We  accept  and  acknowledge  the  doctrines  of  the  un- 
altered Augsburg  Confession  in  its  original  sense,  as  tliroughout 
in  conforniit}^  with  the  pure  truth  of  which  God's  Word  is  the 
only  rule.  We  accept  its  statements  of  truth  as  in  perfect  ac- 
cordance with  the  canonical  Scriptures.  V/e  reject  the  errors 
it -condemns,  and  believe  that  all  which  it  commits  to  the 
libert}'  of  the  Church,  of  right  belongs  to  that  liberty." 

But  while  thus  maintaining  that  the  acceptance 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  is 
enough  to  decide  the  Lutheran  character  of  a 
teacher  or  a  Church  or  a  Synod,  nevertheless, 
where  the  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg  Confession 
have  been  called  into  question  and  involved  in 
controver.sy,  and  where  the  Confession  has  been 
subscribed  by  those  who  disbelieved  and  doubted 
its  doctrines,  and  who  attempted  to  justify  their 
subscription  upon  the  plea  that  they  w^ere  at  liberty 

7 


98  DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

to  make  their  own  interpretation  of  the  meaning  of 
the  Confession,  and  that  the  Confession  could  be 
properly  subscribed  at  the  same  time  by  parties 
holding  diverse  views  of  what  it  meant,  it  has  at 
times  become  necessary  to  restate  the  doctrines  of 
the  unaltered  Confession  in  ampler  Confessions. 
These  add  nothing  to  the  Augsburg  Confession,  but 
only  guard  it  from  ambiguities.  The  arguments 
and  illustrations  which  they  give  are  not  the  proper 
objects  of  the  subscription.  All  that  is  to  be  de- 
termined is  the  true  meaning  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession.  As  the  entire  principle  of  Confessional 
subscription,  according  to  which  Confessions,  as 
contracts,  are  to  be  understood  only  in  the  sense 
given  them  by  those  who  first  published  them,  has 
been  so  often  violated  with  respect  to  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  it  becomes  necessary  for  the  Church  to 
know,  with  respect  to  each  of  its  ministers,  as  to 
what  is  the  construction  which  he  puts  upon  it. 
Hence  the  Apology,  the  Smalcald  Articles,  the 
Catechisms  of  Luther  and  the  Formula  of  Concord, 
are  adopted  as  consistent  exhibitions  and  defences 
of  the  doctrines  taught  in  the  Fundamental  Con- 
fession. The  last  of  these  "Principles,"  therefore, 
is: 

**  IX.  In  thus  formally  accepting  and  acknowledging  the  un- 
altered Augsburg  Confession,  we  declare  our  conviction  that 
the  other  Confessions  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  in- 
asmuch as  they  set  forth  none  other  than  its  system  of  doctrine, 
and  articles  of  faith,  are  of  necessity  pure  and  Scriptural." 


OF  THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL.        99 

This  sentence  must  be  placed  alongside  of  Prin- 
ciple VII  above  given.  By  "other  Confessions  of 
the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,"  those  are 
meant  "which  sincerely  hold  and  truthfully  con- 
fess the  doctrines  of-  the  unaltered  Augsburg  Con- 
fession." Any  one  familiar  with  the  Lutheran 
"  Church  Orders,"  whose  confession  has  been  made 
the  standard  of  the  "Common  Service"  by  General 
Synod,  General  Council  and  United  Synod,  can 
give  an  account  of  the  doctrinal  formulas  which 
are  included  in  most  of  them,  intended  to  promote 
the  pure  teaching  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  in  the  respective  Lutheran  countries 
for  which  the  "  Orders  "  were  prepared.  They  are 
examples  of  the  "other  Confessions."  All  such 
Confessions,  then,  as  harmonize  with  the  doctrines 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  the  General  Council 
acknowledges  as  "of  necessity  pure  and  Scrip- 
tural." All  Confessions,  whether  of  the  Lutheran 
name  or  not,  that  do  not  harmonize  therewith,  it 
rejects  and  condemns. 

"  Preeminent  among  such  accordant,  pure  and  Scriptural 
statements  of  doctrine,  by  their  intrinsic  excellence,  by  the 
great  and  necessary  ends  for  which  they  were  prepared,  by 
their  historical  position,  and  by  the  general  judgment  of  the 
Church,  are  these:  the  Apology  of  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
the  Smalcald  Articles,  the  Catechisms  of  Luther  and  the 
Formula  of  Concord,  all  of  which  are,  with  the  unaltered 
Augsburg  Confession,  in  the  perfect  harmony  of  one  and  the 
same  Scriptural  faith." 

This  reference  to  the   full  body   of  Confessions 


lOO        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

contained  in  the  "Book  of  Concord"  is  intended 
for  tlie  ministry,  and  not  for  the  laity.  It  is  under- 
stood that  greater  demands  must  be  made  of  a 
public  teacher  than  of  private  members,  of  pro- 
fessors of  theology  than  of  pastors  ;  just  as  in  civil 
life,  only  those  "learned  in  the  law"  are  compe- 
tent for  positions  as  judges,  or  even  as  attorneys, 
and,  therefore,  must  be  subjected  to  a  special  ex- 
amination. It  is  presupposed  that  every  candi- 
date for  the  Lutheran  ministry  has  spent  sufficient 
time  in  preparation  for  his  work  to  learn  the 
history  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg  Confession 
in  their  relation  to  subsequent  controversies  and  to 
be  ready  to  declare  where  a  statement  of  the  results 
of  those  controversies  can  be  found. 

Taking  the  fullest  of  these  Confessions,  the 
Formula  of  Concord,  as  an  example,  we  may  briefly 
review  its  office  and  significance,  i.  It  teaches  that 
consistency  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  requires  us,  on  the  one  hand,  to  reject 
the  view  that,  since  the  fall,  man's  nature  is  sin, 
and  on  the  other,  to  teach  that  it  is  not  sin,  but  sin- 
ful. Who  will  dispute  the  correctness  of  this  teach- 
ing? Who  would  defend,  as  a  true  adherent  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  one  who  would  teach  that  the 
nature  that  Christ  assumed  was  in  itself  sin  ? 
There  is  here  no  addition  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession;  but  only  an  application  of 
one  of  these  doctrines  to  a  stated  controversy. 
2.   It  teaches  the  complete   inability  of  uuregener- 


OF   THK   GENERAL   COUNCIL.  ICI 

ate  mail  in  spiritual  things,  and  that  conversion  is 
entirely  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Who  that 
accepts  Article  XVIII  of  the  Augsburg-  Confession 
can  decide  otherwise?  Here  again  there  is  no- 
thing but  the  application  of  a  doctrine  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  to  a  stated  controversy.  3.  It 
teaches  that  the  righteousness  which  avails  before 
God  for  our  forgiveness,  is  onl}'  that  which  Christ 
wrought  for  us  in  his  divinely  human  person,  and 
that  this  righteousness  is  received  only  by  faith, 
and  that  faith  is  not  mere  historical  knowledge, 
but  a  divinely  wrought  energy  in  man.  Can  any 
one  wlio  has  studied  the  Augsburg  Confession  de- 
tect in  this  any  inconsistency  with  its  doctrines? 
Again  we  have  only  the  application  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  x^ugsburg  Confession  to  stated  controversies. 
4.  Good  works  inevitably  follow  faith  in  Christ, 
and  such  an  expression  as  that  "they  are  injurious 
to  salvation  "  should  be  condemned.  5.  The  Law 
convicts  of  sin;  the  Gospel  alone  brings  grace  and 
pardon.  6.  The  Law  has  three  uses:  (a)  For  out- 
ward discipline;  (b)  to  convict  of  sin;  (c)  as  a  rule 
of  life  to  the  regenerate.  7.  The  Body  and  Blood 
of  Christ  are  truly  present  with  the  bread  and  wine 
in  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  are  orally  received, 
not  in  a  natural,  but  in  a  supernatural  and  sac- 
ramental manner  by  all  who  partake,  so  as  to 
strengthen  the  faith  of  even  the  weakest  of  be- 
lieving communicants,  and  to  bring  judgment 
upon  impenitent  and  unbelieving  communicants. 


I03        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES  AND   USAGES 

8.  The  human  nature  of  Christ  by  its  union  with 
the  divine  actually  participates  in  the  power  and 
majesty  of  the  divine  nature;  and  although,  during 
his  humiliation,  the  human  nature  abstained  from 
the  full  use  of  these  communicated  gifts,  since  it 
is  exalted  to  the  Right  Hand  of  God,  the  human 
nature  now  fully  exercises  all  that  the  divine  im- 
parts to  it.  This  is  only  a  somewhat  more  ex- 
plicit statement  of  what  is  taught  in  Article  III  of 
the  Augsburg  Confession.  9.  Christ's  descent  to 
hell  belongs  to  his  triumph.  How  this  occurred 
should  not  be  investigated;  like  all  other  mysteries, 
its  solution  should  be  awaited  until  the  next  world. 
10.  The  Church  of  God  of  every  time  and  place  has 
the  power,  according  to  circumstances,  to  change 
its  ceremonies  in  such  manner  as  is  most  edify- 
ing; ceremonies  not  commanded  in  Holy  Scripture 
are  in  themselves  no  part  of  the  service  of  God;  but 
in  time  of  persecution,  matters  which  in  them- 
selves are  indifferent,  may,  because  of  their  re- 
lations, become  essential.  This  is  simply  a  repe- 
tion  and  application  of  Article  XXVI  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession.  11.  The  doctrine  concerning 
election  must  be  learned  not  from  the  secret  will  of 
God,  but  from  the  Gospel,  and  every  element  in- 
cluded in  the  way  of  salvation  taught  in  the  Gos- 
pel enters  into  the  decree  of  election.  This  is 
mentioned  already  in  Article  V.  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession.  12.  The  last  article  groups  together  the 
rejection  of  numerous  false  propositions.     We  ask: 


OF  THE   GENERAL  COUNCIL.  103 

Is  it  consistent  with  the  Augsburg  Confesion,  or 
is  it  not,  to  teach  "  Christ  did  not  assume  body  and 
blood  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  but  brought  them 
with  him  from  heaven?"  Is  it  adding  to  the 
Augsburg  Confession  to  say  plainly  that  such  is 
not  the  teaching  of  those  who  subscribe  it  ?  Or 
what  of  the  second  error  condemned:  '' Christ  is 
not  true  God,  but  only  has  more  gifts  than  any 
other  man?"  Or  the  third:  ''Our  righteousness 
before  God  consists  in  renewal  and  our  own  god- 
liness?" Or  the  fourth:  "  Unbaptized  children  are 
not  sinners  before  God  ?"  Or  the  fifth:  "  Children 
should  not  be  baptized  until  they  have  attained 
their  reason?"  Some  one  advances  the  opinion: 
*'That  is  no  true  Christian  congregation  wherein 
sinners  are  still  found,"  and  insists  that,  according 
to  his  interpretation  of  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
such  a  view  is  not  condemned,  and,  therefore,  he 
must  have  freedom  as  a  Lutheran  minister  to  pro- 
claim it.  Dare  the  churches  which  profess  the 
Augsburg  Confession  be  hindered  from  being  faith- 
ful to  their  trust  in  framing  an  explicit  declaration 
whereby  their  condemnation  of  such  error  may  be 
known  ?  or  are  they  disloyal  to  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession in  so  doing?  Or  whenever  some  specific 
error,  either  in  doctrine  or  morals,  arises  that 
threatens  to  overthrow  the  faith,  or  at  least  to  dis- 
turb and  confuse  Christian. people,  is  it  not  rather 
the  plain  duty  of  the  professed  teachers  of  the 
Church  to  sound  the  note  of  alarm  against  it,  even 


I04        DISTINCTIVK   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

though  they  have  to  use  somewhat  different  phrase- 
ology from  that  of  the  Church's  fundamental  Con- 
fession? 

The  General  Council,  by  this  proposition,  in  no 
way  questions  the  Lutheran  character  of  those 
who  actually  hold  to  and  firmly  maintain  all 
the  doctrines  of  Unaltered  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, even  though  they  may  have  some  difficul- 
ties concerning  the  policy  of  the  ecclesiastical 
endorsement  of  the  other  Confessions;  but,  at  the 
same  time,  it  indicates  that  the  only  hope  of  abid- 
ing harmony  is  found,  in  not  ignoring  the  experi- 
ence through  which  the  Lutheran  Church  has 
passed  in  maintaining  the  doctrines  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  but  in  keeping  ever  in  mind  the 
application  of  these  doctrines  that  had  to  be  made 
by  the  other  Confessions,  in  order  to  save  the  Luth- 
eran Church   from  hopeless  discord  and  confusion. 

In  so  doing  it  entered  no  new  path,  but 
followed  the  consistent  development  of  Lutheran 
Tlieology,  as  exhibited  not  only  in  the  great 
theologians  of  our  Church,  but  especially  in  such 
earnest  and  w^ell-matured  practical  Christians  and 
Church-organizers  as  Arndt  and  Spener,  August 
Hermann  Francke  and  Henry  IMelchior  Muhlen- 
berg, who  clearl}^  recognized  the  new  demands 
made  by  new  issues  forced  upon  the  Lutheran 
Church,  in  the  confession  of  the  Scriptural  faith 
of  Augsburg  in  the  ampler  Confessions. 

Among  these  issues,  one  of  the  principal  arose 


OF  THE   GENERAL   COUNCIL.  IO5 

from  the  fact  that  the  Peace  of  Augsburg  of  1555, 
confinned  by  the  Peace  of  Westphalia  of  1648,  guar- 
anteed to  Protestants  freedom  of  religious  worship 
upon  the  sole  condition  of  subscription  to  the  Augs- 
burg Confession.  Repeatedly  Reformed  theologians 
and  princes,  who  protested  against  the  distinctive 
doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  signed  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  and  were  allowed  the  rights 
guaranteed  Lutherans,  ujdou  the  plea  of  a  general, 
but  not  of  a  specific  agreement  w^ith  it.  The  Con- 
fession thus  lost  its  place  as  a  doctrinal  test  among 
Lutherans.  When  the  mark  placed  upon  a  house 
in  "The  Arabian  Nights"  was  industriously  copied 
upon  all  the  houses  in  the  neighborhood  by  enter- 
prising boys,  it  ceased  to  be  a  distinguishing  char- 
acter. The  signatures  to  the  Confession  of  many 
who  did  not  accept  all  its  doctrines  rendered  every 
signature  doubtful.  It  was  for  such  reason  that 
Arndt,  in  his  dying  testimony,  most  solemnly  con- 
fessed "the  true  religion  of  the  F'ormula  of  Con- 
cord," and  Spener  wrote  an  especial  treatise  in 
defence  of  the  same  Formula,  and  the  Halle  Fac- 
ulty declared  that  they  held  w^ith  absolute  firmness 
to  all  the  Symbolical  Books,  and  Muhlenberg 
challeuQred  his  accusers  to  find  anvthinof  that  he 
had  said  or  written  in  conflict  with  them. 

The  General  Council  has  simply  placed  itself 
unequivocally  upon  the  foundation  laid  in  the  first 
Constitution  of  the  Mother  Synod,  the  Ministerium 
of  Pennsylvania  (ch.    vi.    §   2):    "Every   minister 


Io6        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

professes  that  he  holds  to  the  word  of  God  and  our 
Symbolical  Books."  The  revision  in  1792,  after 
Muhlenberg's  death,  erased  this  provision,  thus 
involving  later  generations  in  untold  difficulties 
and  dangers  from  doctrinal  indifferentism,  until  a 
return  was  made  to  the  firmer  and  clearer  basis  of 
the  Fathers  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  this 
country. 


Following  these  '^  Principles  of  Faith  "  are  those 
of  "Church  Polity."  They  may  be  briefly  out- 
lined as  follows: 

The  power  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  Supreme 
Head  of  the  Church,  can  be  delegated  to  no  man  or 
body  of  men  on  earth.  All  the  power  which  the 
Church  can  exercise  is  through  the  administration 
of  the  Word  and  sacraments,  and  is  obligatory 
upon  its  members  only  according  to  the  degree  in 
which  it  is  faithful  to  Holy  Scripture.  The  con- 
gregations are  the  primary  bodies  through  which 
this  power  is  normally  exercised.  Congregations 
may  act  through  representatives  in  Synods,  and 
these  Synods  again  in  a  General  Body.  The  de- 
cisions of  Synods  command  respect,  chiefly  because 
they  are  presumed  to  be  guarded  by  constitutional 
provisions,  which  give  greater  probability  of  cor- 
rectness than  those  of  any  single  congregations  or 
individuals.  They  are  constantly  subject  to  revi- 
sion and  appeal  by  the  congregations.  Synods  can 
deal  with  each  other  only  as  Synods,  and  the  official 


OF   THE   GENERAL  COUNCIL.  107 

record  must  be  accepted  as  evidence  of  the  doctrinal 
position.  Synods  are  organized  to  maintain  sound 
doctrine,  settle  controversies,  regulate  the  externals 
of  worship  according  to  the  New  Testament,  and 
in  keeping  with  the  liberty  of  the  Church,  and 
make  provision  for  carrying  on  the  Church's  work 
in  every  department  of  beneficent  labor. 

In  the  ''Constitution  for  Congregations,"  which 
claimed  the  attention  of  the  General  Council  for  a 
number  of  years,  the  Unaltered  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion and  the  Small  Catechism  alone  are  expressly 
mentioned  as  the  doctrinal  standards  of  the  congre- 
gation, while  the  pastor  is  obligated  besides  to  the 
Apology,  Large  Catechism,  Smalcald  Articles  and 
Formula  of  Concord.  The  Lay  Eldership  is 
omitted,  the  Deacons  being,  with  the  Pastor  or 
Pastors,  the  only  members  of  the  Church  Council. 
This  provision,  however,  has  not  been  universally 
adopted,  the  Lay  Eldership  introduced  by  Muhlen- 
berg still  maintaining  a  firm  hold,  especially  in 
Pennsylvania.  The  Church  Year  and  its  festivals 
are  recognized  in  the  same  document,  as  well  as 
catechetical  instruction,  and  a  previous  notice  on 
the  part  of  those  desiring  to  partake  of  the  Lord's 
Supper. 

Concerning  Chiliasm,  the  General  Council  de- 
clared at  Pittsburg,  in  1868,  that  "it  has  neither 
had,  nor  would  consent  to  have,  fellowship  with  any 
Synod  which  tolerates  the  'Jewish  opinions  ^  con- 
demned in  the  XVII  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession.'* 


Io8        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES    AND    USAGES 

In  the  same  declaration  it  warned  against  "all 
societies  for  moral  and  religious  ends  which  do  not 
rest  upon  the  supreme  authority  of  God's  Word,  or 
recognize  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  true  God,  and 
the  only  Mediator,"  "or  which  assume  to  them- 
selves what  God  has  given  to  His  Church  and  its 
ministers,"  or  "require  undefined  obligations  to 
be  assumed  by  oath."  In  the  Swedish  Augustana 
Synod,  members  of  secret  societies  are  excluded 
from  the  communion  of  the  Church;  in  the  other 
Synods  the  testimony  against  them  is  more  or  less 
pronounced,  although  Church  discipline  against 
them  is  rigidly  exercised  only  in  a  few  places. 

Concerning  "Exchange  of  Pulpits,"  the  same 
declaration  forbids  the  admission  to  our  pulpits  of 
any  man,  "whether  of  the  Lutheran  name  or  of 
any  other,  of  whom  there  is  just  reason  to  doubt 
whether  he  will  preach  the  pure  truth  of  God's 
Word  as  taught  in  the  Confession  of  our  Church." 
Concerning  the  preaching  by  Lutheran  ministers 
in  other  pulpits,  the  Pittsburgh  Declaration  of  1868 
was  reafhrmed  at  Philadelphia  in  1885,  and  was 
rediscussed  at  Pittsburgh  in  1889.      According  to  it: 

"Lutheran  ministers  may  properly  preach  wherever  there  is 
an  opening  in  the  pulpit  of  other  churches,  unless  the  circum- 
stances imply,  or  seem  to  imply,  a  fellowship  with  error  or 
schism,  or  a  restriction  on  the  unreserved  expression  of  the 
whole  counsel  of  God." 

The  Akron  Declaration  of  1872  was  not  intended 
as  an  ample  exhibition  of  the  entire  subject  of  Pul- 


OF  THE   GENERAL   COUNCIL.  IO9 

pit  and  Altar  Fellowship,  but  simply  to  state  cer- 
tain general  principles  which  seemed  to  be  self- 
evident,  making  no  new  rule,  but  simply  stating 
what  was  generally  understood  to  be  the  practice 
in  all  our  Churches. 

"  I.  The  rule  is  :  Lutheran  pulpits  are  for  Lutheran  ministers 
only,     Lutheran  altars  are  for  Lutheran  communicants  only. 

"  II.  The  exceptions  to  the  rule  belong  to  the  sphere  of  privi- 
lege, not  of  right. 

"III.  The  determination  of  the  exceptions  is  to  be  made  in 
consonance  ^vitll  these  principles  by  the  conscientious  judgment 
of  pastors,  as  the  cases  arise." 

This  means  that  no  one  is  to  be  admitted  either 
to  the  pulpit  or  the  altar,  unless  the  Church,  or  its 
officers  acting  for  it,  are  satisfied  as  to  his  fitness 
and  preparation.  The  responsibility  in  botli  cases 
is  so  great  that  there  should  be  no  encouragement 
of  the  setting  aside  of  the  Church's  provisions  for 
guarding  these  two  most  holy  places.  No  denial 
of  either  the  Christian  character  or  the  ministerial 
standing  of  any  one  who  would  be  excluded  by  the 
strict  enforcement  of  such  rule,  is  intended.  It 
simply  means  that  the  Lutheran  Church  and  no 
other  communion  is  responsible  for  those  who 
preach  and  commune  in  a  Lutheran  church.  For 
a  number  of  years  it  was  a  question  of  controversy 
in  the  General  Council,  whether  the  action  at 
Galesburg  in  1875,  which  declared  the  Rule  Scrip- 
tural, abrogated  or  not  the  exceptions  provided  for 
at  Akron.  The  General  Council  at  Pittsburgh,  in 
1889,  declared  that  the  two  declarations  were  ex- 


no       DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES  AND  USAGES 

planatory  of  each  other,  and,  therefore,  that  the 
principle  of  exceptions  to  be  made  by  pastors  as 
circumstances  arise,  still  stands.  The  exceptions, 
however,  must  be  such  as  carry  out  the  spirit  of 
the  Rule. 

Closely  connected  with  this  is  the  definition 
made  at  Lancaster,  O.,  in  1870,  of  "fundamental 
doctrines,"  in  which  the  distinction  is  drawn  be- 
tween "doctrines  which  are  fundamental  to  the 
existence  of  Christianity,"  and  those  "which  are 
fundamental  to  the  complete  integrity  of  Chris- 
tianity." The  "fundamental  errorists  "  to  be  ex- 
cluded from  the  Lord's  Table  are  declared  to  be 
"those  who  wilfully,  wickedly  and  persistently 
desert,  in  whole  or  in  part,  the  Christian  faith." 


There  has  been  no  controversy  within  the  Gen- 
eral Council  on  the  subject  of  election,  and,  there- 
fore, no  official  declaration  by  the  Council  on  the 
subject  that  has  so  largely  occupied  the  attention 
of  a  number  of  the  Synods.  An  "Opinion"  was, 
however,  published  in  1884  by  the  Philadelphia 
Faculty,  declaring  that  the  terms  ^^ intuitu  fidei^^'' 
*'^ex  praevisa  Jide^^  do  not  present  a  satisfactory 
solution  of  the  theological  problem,  but  that  the 
condemnation  of  the  use  of  such  terms,  when  ex- 
plained with  the  limitations  placed  upon  them  by 
our  Lutheran  dogmaticians,  is  not  justified  by  the 
Confession  of  our  Church.  It  is  the  general  teach- 
ing that  faith  holds  the  same  relation  to  election 


OF  THE   GENERAL  COUNCIL.  Ill 

as  to  justification,  and  that,  as  we  are  justified,  not 
on  account  of  faith,  so  also  we  are  elected  not  on 
account  of  faith;  but  that  we  are  both  elected  and 
justified  with  respect  to,  or  through  the  merits  of 
Christ  apprehended  by  faith,  or  with  respect  to  or 
through  faith  apprehending  the  merits  of  Christ. 
Man  can  in  no  way  prepare  himself  for  divine 
grace,  or  even  co-operate,  by  his  own  powders,  with 
divine  grace,  when  it  approaches  him.  Faith  itself 
is  entirely  the  gift  of  God,  brought  to  man  and 
wrought  in  man,  through  the  means  of  grace. 
Man's  will  is  free  to  resist  this  grace  at  any  stage. 
If  man  be  saved,  he  is  saved  altogether  by  God's 
grace;  if  he  be  lost,  he  is  lost  altogether  by  his  own 
sin  and  fault.  That  one  accepts  and  another  re- 
jects divine  grace,  is  not  due  to  a  difference  made 
between  the  two  by  God's  will.  The  universal 
grace  of  God  is  made  particular  by  the  obstinate 
resistance  of  those  who  repel  the  Holy  Spirit.  In 
those  who  accept  divine  grace,  even  the  power  to 
cease  to  resist  is  a  special  gift  and  endow^nent  of 
the  Spirit.  What  we  call  in  time  justification,  is, 
with  respect  to  the  eternity  that  precedes  time, 
election.  God's  foreknowledge  of  the  justifica- 
tion of  individual  believers,  is  his  election,  with 
only  this  difference,  that,  as  the  will  is  impelled 
by  no  irresistible  grace,  its  liability  to  fall  con- 
tinues to  the  end  of  this  life,  and  hence  justifi- 
cation may  be  only  temporary  ;  but  with  respect 
to    those    who    remain    in    a    justified    state   until 


112        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

the  end  of  this  life,  election  and  justification  coin- 
cide. Election  is  thus  the  pretemporal  record  of 
the  justification  of  those  who  die  in  Clirist.  The 
entire  tendency  among  us  is  to  follow  Luther's 
latter  course,  viz.,  when  troubled  with  thoughts 
concerning  election  to  find  the  answer  by  a  con- 
sideration of  what  is  involved  in  justification. 
Mysteries  enough  still  remain,  into  the  reasons  for 
which  we  make  no  attempt  to  inquire. 


The  Language  Question  has  been  a  prominent 
feature  in  all  the  discussions  and  work  of  the 
Council.  The  German,  the  Swedish  and  the  Eng- 
lish have  all  a  good  representation  at  all  its  meet- 
ings, with  an  occasional  addition  of  the  Norwe- 
gian. The  Germans  have  preponderated  in  num- 
bers; the  English  have  very  largely  shaped  its  leg- 
islation and  led  in  its  debates,  while  the  Swedes 
have  held  the  balance  of  power.  At  the  urgent 
request  of  the  Swedes,  the  English  has  been  made 
the  official  language  of  the  Council,  any  one  who 
uses  another  language,  except  from  clear  necessity, 
being  in  danger  of  a  call  to  order  from  the  Sw^edish 
brethren.  At  Chicago,  in  1869,  the  Council  de- 
clared that  "it  is  just  as  possible  to  hold  the  Luth- 
eran faith  and  observe  Lutheran  usages  in  the 
English  language  as  in  the  German;"  that  "the 
pastors  and  people  of  our  German  and  Scandina- 
vian churches  should  cheerfully  and  conscien- 
tiously promote  the  transfer  into  English  Evangel- 


OF   THE    GENKRAL   COUNCIL.  II3 

ical  Lutheran  cluirclics,  of  all  those  who  do  not 
understand  the  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God  in 
the  language  of  their  fathers,"  and,  where  there  is 
no  English  Lutheran  church,  "encouraging  the 
necessary  steps  as  soon  as  possible  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  English  IMission  Sunday-schools  and 
Churches:" 


The  General  Council  has  always  been  ready  to 
cooperate  in  every  way,  consistent  with  her  prin- 
ciples, with  other  bodies  of  the  Lutheran  Church. 
She  has  made  provision  for  a  representation  at  her 
Sessions  and  participation  in  her  debates  of  any 
Synods  that  adopt  the  "Fundamental  Principles." 
In  this  way  the  German  Synod  of  Iowa  and  for- 
mer Norwegian  Augustana  Synod,  for  years,  par- 
ticipated in  the  discussions,  and  were  represented 
on  her  committees.  The  same  is  true  of  the  Joint 
Synod  of  Ohio  at  her  first  meeting.  She  offered  to 
meet  any  time  in  free  conference  the  representa- 
tives of  S3mods  who  desired  it.  In  1873  ^^^^  P^^" 
posed  to  the  General  vSynod  and  ether  bodies  the 
holding  of  a  colloquium,  "in  which  all  Lutherans 
who  accept  the  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession 
may  compare  views  in  regard  to  the  Confession." 
She  entered  in  good  faith  into  the  movement  for  a 
Common  Order  of  Service,  and  heartily  cooperated 
in  every  stage  of  its  preparation. 


The  Liturgical  activity  of  the  General  Council 
8 


114        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

lias  been  inherited  from  her  oldest  Synod,  the 
Ministeriuni  of  Pennsylvania.  When  the  General 
Council  was  formed,  the  English  Church-Book  was 
almost  finished.  It  had  just  been  published  at  the 
second  session  of  the  Council  in  1868.  It  was  very 
generally  introduced  into  the  town  and  city  and 
many  of  the  country  churches,  with  some  varia- 
tion, however,  as  to  the  amount  of  the  service  used. 
Prejudice  gradually  vanished,  and  the  Church-Book 
grew  every  year  more  and  more  deeply  into  the 
affections  of  the  people,  proving,  wherever  intro- 
duced, a  powerful  educator.  The  German  Kirchen- 
btuh  follov/ed.  This,  however,  encountered  more 
opposition,  for  several  reasons:  It  was  difficult  to 
replace  the  familiar  hymns  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Synod's  book  by  the  more  sober,  but  severely 
classical  hymns  of  the  new  book.  The  opposition 
of  Southern  Germans  to  a  full  liturgical  order  was 
difficult  to  overcome.  It  has,  however,  been  also 
working  its  way  constantly  towards  a  united  use. 
When  the  ''Common  Order  of  Service"  was  pre- 
pared, the  instructions  which  guided  the  Joint 
Committee  being  the  same  as  those  according  to 
which  the  Church-Book  had  been  compiled,  led  to 
essentially  the  same  result,  without  any  effort  on 
the  part  of  the  General  Council's  representatives  to 
determine  it. 

The  New  Church-Book  of  1891  is  the  Old 
Church-Book,  slightly  modified  by  the  Common 
Service  revision,  with  the  materials  for  Matins  and 


OF   THE   GENERAL   COUNCIIv. 


115 


Vespers  inserted,  and  full  orders  provided,  accord- 
ing to  the  co7iscnsus  of  the  XVI  century  for  Minis- 
terial Acts.  Its  introduction  has  only  fairly  begun ; 
but  great  interest  is  taken  by  pastors,  especially  in 
the  new  Vesper  Service.  With  the  music  of  the 
*' School  and  Parish  Hymnal"  of  the  Rev.  J.  F. 
Ohl,  recommended  by  the  Church-Book  Commit- 
tee, and  that  provided  in  "  Church  Song"  by  Dr. 
J.  A.  Seiss,  as  well  as  in  the  forthcoming  revised 
and  enlarged  edition  of  "The  Church  Book  with 
Music  "  by  Mrs.  Spaeth,  ample  material  is  at  hand 
for  its  correct  and  edifying  rendering.  In  many  of 
the  Sunday-schools,  the  worship  has  been  conducted 
for  years  according  to  a  modification  of  Vespers; 
and  it  is  confidently  expected  that  by  this  means 
the  process  of  further  accustoming  the  people  to 
a  full  Lutheran  Service  will  be  accomplished.  The 
Service  is  prized  especially  for  its  clear  confession 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  in  due  proportion,  in 
regular  order,  and  with  such  admirable  compre- 
hensiveness as  to  present  throughout  the  year  the 
whole  counsel  of  God.  It  is  of  itself  a  creed  of  the 
people,  according  to  the  rule  of  St.  Augustine: 
Lex  supplicandi  est  lex  credendi^  giving  simplest 
and  most  popular  expression  to  the  doctrines  more 
amply  stated  and  defended  in  the  formal  and  fuller 
Confessions.  But  it  is  far  more  than  a  creed.  The 
plan  of  salvation  is  not  minutely  dissected,  as  has 
to  be  done  in  accurate  dogmatic  definitions,  framed 
for  the  schools,  but  is  presented  in  all  its  simplicity 


Il6        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND    USAGES 

and  concrete  reality.     All  its  various  parts  center 
around  Christ,  presenting  Him  in  all  His  offices,  in 
both  His  states,  in  the  fulness  of  His  work,  and  in 
all  His  relations  to  the  sinful  and  sorrowing,  the 
penitent  and  believing,  the  afflicted  and  tempted, 
the  dying  and  the  glorified.     Its   lessons  and  re- 
sponses and  collects  and  chants  are  intended  simply 
to  carry  the  devotions  of  the  worshippers  to  the 
Throne  of  Grace,  as  far  as  possible,   in  the  very 
words  of  Holy  Scripture.     Wherever  introduced  it 
is  affectionately  cherished    by   the    congregations, 
who  could  scarcely  be  persuaded  to  become  accus- 
tomed  to  the  coldness  and  formality  and  incoher- 
ency,   affording  little  food   for  the   heart,  that  so 
often  characterizes  a  Service  without  a  fixed  order. 
Nevertheless,  our  churches  most  devoted  to  the 
Church-Book  are  not  so   bound  to  the  appointed 
lessons  and  prayers,  as  not,  under  peculiar  and  ex- 
ceptional circumstances,    to  vary    or  depart    from 
them,    or   even    to    entirely    dispense   with    them. 
Where  the  prayers  provided  do  not  meet  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  worshippers,  there  is  no  diffi- 
culty in  finding  others  that  are  suitable.     Where 
the  people  are  unable  to  use  a  full  Lutheran  Ser- 
vice to  edification,  no  attempt  is  made  to  force  it 
upon  them.     The  general  feeling  is  that  the  man  is 
to  be  pitied  who  is  so  bound  to  a  Liturgy  as  to  be 
unable  to  find  any  edification  except  in  a  prayer 
that  is  read;  but  that  he  is  equally  to  be  pitied  wdio 
can  find  no  edification  in   the  fixed  prayers  upon 


OF   THE   GENERAL   COUNCIL.  II7 

which  the  yearnings  of  the  hearts  of  millions  of 
God's  people  have  ascended  to  Heaven  for  many 
centuries. 


The  General  Council  is  only  at  the  beginning  of 
its  work.  ]Much  time  has  been  spent  in  laying  the 
foundation  broadly  and  deeply,  and  in  answering 
questions  that  must  be  understood  before  a  basis  of 
widely-extended,  solid  and  harmonious  work  can 
be  reached.  Her  embarrassments  have  arisen 
largely  from  the  comprehensiveness  of  her  aims. 
In  the  endeavor  to  further,  as  far  as  possible,  union 
among  all  Lutherans  in  this  country,  elements 
have  been  brought  together  at  her  conventions  that, 
except  for  the  common  faith,  were  largely  strange 
to  one  another.  The  very  circumstances  which 
President  Bassler  noted  at  the  first  convention,  as 
indicating  a  remarkable  Providence,  have  brought 
corresponding  difficulties.      He  said: 

"That  so  rnaiiy  persons  should  come  together— persons  who 
have  been  educated  in  different  institutions,  under  diverse  in- 
fluences—even in  different  countries,  and  using  different  lan- 
guages— and  yet  should  be  able  to  see  eye  to  eye,  so  far  as  to 
use  the  same  words  in  declaring  their  apprehension  of  God's 
Word,  e,  g.  in  the  confession  of  their  faith  ;  and  not  only  to  use 
the  same  words,  but  to  use  these  words  in  one  and  the  same 
sense,  is  certainly  the  work  of  God's  Holy  Spirit." 

But  these  advantages  have  been  partially  offset 
by  the  fact  that  it  requires  time  to  make  such 
a  body  thoroughly  homogeneous.  Christian  men 
must  not  only  have  the  same  faith,  and  subscribe 
to  the  same  Confession,  but  must  learn  to  know 


I  1 8        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

and  understand  one  another  by  a  long  experience, 
to  make  due  allowances  for  each  others'  faults,  and 
to  appreciate  the  graces  of  the  Spirit  that  often 
abound  in,  and  beyond,  and  above,  the  sometimes 
more  visible  works  of  the  flesh.  If  the  entire 
Lutheran  Church  of  America  is  ever  to  be  united, 
it  will  pass  through  the  very  same  experience. 
Activity  and  earnestness,  within  one  organization, 
of  those  who  have  been  previously  separated,  mean 
discussion,  delay,  and  sometimes  even  considerable 
friction,  before  a  thorough  understanding  is  reached. 
John  Damascenus,  the  great  theologian  of  the 
Greek  Church,  has  well  said:  ahv&Eoig  apxv  jidxr]^,  i.  e., 
''Union  is  the  beginning  of  controversy."  The 
question  that  is  often  to  be  decided  is  as  to  whether 
the  understanding  should  be  reached  before  or  after 
union,  i.  e.  Shall  there  ever  be  union  without 
unity?  The  General  Council  had  no  choice  to 
make.  With  a  sincere  desire  to  have  all  Lutherans 
in  America  not  only  dwelling  together  in  peace,  but 
also  vigorously  prosecuting  the  great  work  opening 
to  our  Church  in  this  country,  the  efforts  were 
made  to  promote  this  end,  as  Providence  pointed 
the  way.  Never  has  her  harmony  been  greater 
than  at  present;  nor  is  this  "harmony  at  the  ex- 
pense of  her  fidelity,  or  due  to  inactivity  and  in- 
difference. But  her  future,  like  that  of  the  entire 
Lutheran  Church,  is  in  God's  hands;  and  the  lot 
of  the  entire  Church  may  be  read  in  the  career 
through  which  she  has  passed  and  is  passing. 


THE  SYNODICAL  CONFERENCE. 


BY 

REV.  PROF.  F.  PIEPER. 


\_PreIimmary  Remark.  Since  the  "distinctive 
doctrines  and  usages  of  the  Synodical  Conference  " 
are  based  upon  clearly  understood  general  truths 
and  principles,  the  author  of  this  treatise  has 
deemed  it  appropriate  to  introduce  the  presentation 
of  the  several  articles  here  discussed  by  a  state- 
ment of  the  underlying  principles.] 

OF   THE   CHURCH. 

What  it  is.  The  Church,  in  the  proper  sense  of 
the  term,  is  the  aggregate  of  all  trjie  believers  in 
Christ.  All  those,  and  only  those  who  believe  in 
Christ,  are  members  of  the  Church.  Whoever  be- 
lieves in  Christ,  is  a  member  of  the  Church, 
whether  he  be  in  external  fellowship  with  an  or- 
thodox, or  in  external  union  with  a  heterodox  con- 
gregation, or  in  no  external  connection  \vith  any 
church  at  all.  On  the  other  hand,  whoever  does 
not  believe  in  Christ,  is  not  a  member  of  the  Church, 
although  he  be  a  person  of  good  external  standing 
("9) 


I20       DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

in  an  orthodox  congregation,  or  even  a  minister  or 
liigli  dignitary  in  it.  In  short, /^?V//  ///  Christ  is  the 
all- deciding  factor  in  regard  to  chnrcJi-nienibership. 
The  wicked  2.\\^  the  hypocrites^  although  tliey  have 
^.r//^r;z<7/ fellowship  with  the  Church,  form  wo  part 
of  it.  The  Church  is  the  spiritual  body  of  Christ, 
the  "congregation  of  saints^'^''  whose  hearts, 
through  faith  in  Christ,  are  ruled  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  whilst  all  unbelievers,  however  holy  in 
outward  appearance,  are  in  the  power  of  Satan,  and 
members  of  his  kingdom  (Eph.  ii.  2). 

In  order  to  maintain  the  true  conception  of  the 
Church,  what  is  necessarily  or  commonly  connected 
with  it  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  Church 
itself.  For  instance,  Christ  is  the  head  of  the 
Church,  but  not  the  Church  itself  the  Church 
being  His  spiritual  body  (Eph.  i.  22,  23).  Again, 
The  Word  of  God  and  the  Sacj-aments  are  neces- 
sarily connected  with  the  Church,  they  being  the 
seed  (i  Pet.  i.  23  ;  Mark  iv.  26,  27  ;  Titus  iii.  5,  6), 
and  the  bread  (John  vi.  51  compared  w^ith  John 
viii.  31;  vi.  68;  i  Cor.  xii.  13),  and,  consequently, 
also  the  ti^ae  marks  of  the  Church,  but  they  are  not 
tlie  Church  itself  nor  part  of  it.  Finally,  Christians 
dwelling  together  in  the  same  place  are  bound  io 
unite  also  in  external felloivsliip  for  the  purpose  of 
preaching  and  hearing  the  Word  of  God,  etc.,  and 
they  w<rK  enter  into  a  larger  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion with  other  Churches,  but  no  exter?2al  ecclesi- 
astical organization    of  any  kind   is    the    Church 


OF   THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  121 

itself,  or  part  of  it,  the  Church  being  "properly 
nothing  else  than  the  congregation  of  all  believers 
and  saints"  (Augsb.  Conf,  Art.  VIII).  The 
Church  is  not  a  mere  sum  of  ordinances^  institu- 
tions, ceremonies,  etc.,  but  the  great  spiritual  body 
of  men  believing  in  Christ. 

Importance  of  this  doctrine.  It  is  of  great  im- 
portance to  retain  this  true  definition  of  the 
Church,  because  it  may  easily  be  shown  that  all 
errors  concerning  this  article  of  the  Christian 
faith  spring  from  forgetting  the  simple  truth  that 
the  Church  properly  is  ^^  nothing  else  than  the  con- 
gregation of  believers."  Moreover,  by  retaining 
this  truth,  we  shall  not  content  ourselves  w^ith  be- 
longing merely  to  the  external  communion  of  the 
Church,  but  we  shall  rather  earnestly  take  heed 
that  we  belong  to  the  internal  communion  of  saints, 
and  remain  therein  unto  our  end,  and  thus  in 
eternity.  Finally,  by  keeping  in  view  that  the 
Church  is  the  congregation  of  believers^  we  shall 
not,  for  the  purpose  of  building  and  extending  the 
Church,  resort  to  wrong  means,  such  as  temporal 
power,  external  force,  human  ordinances,  church- 
fairs,  church-fellowship  with  errorists;  for  by  such 
means y?7/V/2  i7i  Christ  is  neither  wrought  nor  pre- 
served, but,  on  the  contrary,  hindered  or  destroyed. 
Keeping  in  mind  that  the  Church  is  the  congrega- 
tion of  believers,  we  shall  rather  faithfully  and 
dilio-entlv  use  the  means  ordained  of  God,  which 
alone  produce  and  preserve  faith  in  Christ  m  the 


122        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

hearts  of  men,  to  wit,  the  preaching  of  the  pure 
Gospel  and  the  right  administration  of  the  Sacra- 
ments. The  stress  laid  on  the  ^^pure  doctrine"  or 
^''pure  Gospel"  must  not  be  ridiculed,  since  the 
Gospel  generates  and  preserves  faith  only  so  far  as 
it  is  pure. 

The  CJnirch  zvithont  zvhich  there  is  no  salvation. 
Of  the  Church  which  "is  the  great  body  of  true 
believers  in  all  parts  of  the  world,  from  the  rising 
of  the  sun  to  his  setting,"  the  proposition  is  true, 
that  there  is  no  salvation  without  the  Church  (extra 
ecclesiam  nulla  salus),  the  proposition  being  equiva- 
lent to  what  our  Lord  says:  "  He  that  believeth  on 
the  Son  hath  everlasting  life;  and  he  that  believeth 
not  the  Son,  shall  not  see  life"  (John  iii.  36). 

TJie  CJntrch  not  conjiiied  within  the  partiatlar 
orthodox  Churches  or  congregations.  The  Church 
witliout  which  there  is  no  salvation,  is  not  confined 
within  the  boundaries  of  the  orthodox  Churches, 
that  is,  of  those  particular  Churches  in  which  all 
the  articles  of  the  Christian  faith  are  taught  in 
their  purity;  but  it  is  found  throughout  the  world 
in  those  ecclesiastical  communities  also  in  which, 
beside  errors,  so  much  of  the  saving  truth  is  taught 
that  true  faith  in  Christ  may  be  produced.  The  so- 
called  "  Missourians,"  although  emphasizing  the 
distinction  between  orthodox  and  heterodox 
Churches,  have  always  rejected  the  doctrine  that 
the  orthodox  Lutheran  Church  is  the  Church,  i.  e., 
the  Church  without  wdiicli  there  is  no  salvation. 


OF   TIIK   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  1 23 

This  doctrine  they  hold  to  be  an  nn-Lntliemn,  yea, 
an  impious  doctrine,  as  it  overthrows  the  main 
article  of  the  Christian  religion,  the  article  that 
man  is  justified  and  saved  by  faith  in  Christ,  not- 
withstanding man's  shortcomings  in  knowledge 
and  life. 

The  CJuirch  is^  and  always  remains^  in  tJiis  life 
invisible. 

As  the  Church  is  nothing  else  than  the  congre- 
gation of  believers,  and  God  only,  the  searcher  of 
hearts,  knows  those  who  truly  believe,  it  is,  and 
always  remains,  in  this  life  invisible.  (Luke  xvii. 
20;  2  Tim.  ii.  19.)  The  Church,  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  term,  is  not  in  part  only  invisible,  in 
part,  however,  visible,  the  audible  and  visible 
means  of  grace  constituting  its  "visible  side." 
What  is  necessarily  connected  \j\W\  the  Church,  is 
not  to  be  confounded  with  the  Chiuxh  itself.  Al- 
though wherever  the  Word  of  God  is  found,  we 
are  to  find  the  Church,  }et  the  Word  of  God  forms 
no  part  of  the  Church,  the  component  parts  of  the 
Church  being  only  the  believers.  This  may  be 
illustrated  by  an  example.  Man  cannot  live  with- 
out air  and  his  daily  bread.  But  the  air  and  the 
daily  bread  do  not  form  an  essential  part  of  man. 
So  the  Church  lives  by  the  Word  of  God,  but  the 
Word  of  God  is  not  an  essential  part  of  the  Church. 
The  Church  itself,  therefore,  can  not  be  called 
visible  on  account  of  the  audible  and  visible  means 
of  ":race. 


124        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

Universal  CJiurcJi  and  particular  Churches. 

The  Scriptures  not  only  speak  of  the  07ie  Church 
(Matt.  xvi.  i8;  Eph.  i,  22.  23),.  but  frequently 
mention  ChurcJies  in  the  plural,  e.  g.^  the  Churches 
oiAsia^  i  Cor.  xvi.  19;  \.\\^  QhuxoSx^^  oi  Macedonia^ 
2  Cor.  viii.  i;  the  Church  of  God  which  is  at 
Corinth^  i  Cor.  i.  2;  the  Church  which  was  at 
Jerusalem.^  Acts  viii.  i;  "tell  it  unto  the  Church^^^ 
Matt,  xviii.  17.  It  is,  therefore,  in  accordance 
with  Scripture  that  we  speak  of  local  or  particular 
Churches.  But  the  relation  existing  between  the 
particular  churches  and  the  una  sancta  (universal 
Church)  ought  to  be  rightly  understood.  Men 
cannot,  like  God,  look  into  the  hearts,  nor  should 
they  try  to  do  so.  We,  therefore,  have  to  consider 
all  such  to  belong  to  the  particular  Church  as 
unite  with  us  in  the  profession  of  faith  and  do  not 
contradict  this  profession  by  an  ungodly  life.  It 
is  in  this  regard  that  tlie  particular  Churches  are 
called  visible  Churches.  But  we  do  not  on  this  ac- 
count set  up  two  Churches.  For  the  visible  par- 
ticular Church  is  a  Churchy  and  is  called  2i  Church 
and  has  the  privileges  of  a  Church  ("  the  power  of 
the  keys  ")  only  on  account  of  the  true  believers  that 
are  within  it.  Th^ particular  (^i.  e.^  local)  Churches, 
therefore,  properly  speaking,  ^:6';z5?>/ of  true  believers 
only,  the  hypocrites  being  i?itermingled  with  the 
Church  through  external  fellowship  solely,  form- 
ing no  part  of  the  particular  Church  itself.  This 
is  evident  from  all  those  passages  of  Scripture  in 


OF  THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  1 25 

which  \\i^  partial  I ai'  Churches  are  described  as  the 
"  Churches  of  God,"  consistiug  of  those  *'  that  are 
sanctified  in  Christ  Jcsiis^^  (i  Cor.  i.  2;  Rom.  i.  7). 
Hence  it  is,  that  a  description  of  an  Evangelical 
Lutheran  local  Church  ("  Ortsgemeinde  ")  is  given 
in  the  following  words  by  Dr.  Walther:  "An 
Evangelical  Lutheran  local  Church  is  an  as- 
sembly of  believing  Christians  in  a  certain  place 
with  whom  the  Word  of  God  is  preached  in  its 
purity,  and  the  holy  Sacraments  are  adminis- 
tered according  to  the  Gospel."  The  relation  be- 
tween the  particular  Churches  and  the  one  uni- 
versal Church  may,  therefore,  be  stated  thus:  the 
aggregate  of  the  particular  Churches  (with  the  ad- 
dition of  those  single  believers  w^ho  are  cut  off  from 
all  external  Church-fellowship)  is  the  one  uni- 
versal Church,  embracing  all  true  believers  in  all 
parts  of  the  w^orld. 

ORTHODOX  AND  HETERODOX  CHURCHES. 

The  particular  Churches  are  of  tzvo  kinds^  de- 
termined by  their  relation  to  the  Word  of  God.  It 
is  Christ's  order  and  precept  that  the  pure 
doctrine,  and  nothing  but  the  pure  doctrine, 
should  be  preached  and  heard  in  His  Cliurch. 
Throughout  the  whole  Scriptures  there  is  not 
found  a  single  passage  which  authorizes  or  permits 
a  minister  to  teach  false  doctrine,  or  a  Christian  to 
unite  with  those  who  teach  false  doctrine.  Hence 
arises  the  difference  between  orthodox  and  hetero- 


126        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

dox  Churches!  A  Church  which  conforms  to  the 
command  of  Christ,  that  is,  a  Church  in  which  the 
Gospel  is  taught  in  its  purity  and  the  Sacraments 
are  administered  according  to  the  Gospel,  is  by 
right  called  an  orthodox  Church;  on  the  other 
hand,  a  Church  w^hich  does  not  conform  to  the 
will  of  Christ,  but  allows  false  doctrine  to  be  taught 
in  its  midst,  is  justly  called  a  heterodox  Church. 
As  ours  is  an  age  of  indifference  to  doctrine, 
Christians  must  take  special  heed  that  the  differ- 
ence between  orthodox  and  heterodox  Churches  be 
not  obliterated.  And  it  should  be  distinctly  under- 
stood that  the  character  of  the  Churches  as  to  their 
orthodoxy,  is  determined  by  the  doctrine  wdiich  is 
actually  taught^  not  by  the  "officially  acknowl- 
edged confession"  kept  perhaps  in  the  archives 
only;  for  Christ  commanded  all  the  articles  of  the 
Christian  faith  to  be  taught,  and  not  kept  on 
record  only. 

The  heterodox  Churches  are  called  both 
' '  Churches ' '  and  ' '  sects ' '  in  diverse  respects.  They 
are  called  Churches  in  so  far  as,  besides  erroneous 
doctrines,  essential  parts  of  the  saving  truth  are  re- 
tained, and,  consequently,  true  children  of  God  may 
be  born  and  are  found  among  them;  they  are  called 
sects  in  so  far  as  they  profess  doctrines  contrary  to 
the  Scriptures,  and,  by  adhering  to  false  doctrine, 
have  caused  division  in  the  Church,  and  con- 
stantly imperil  the  faith  and  salvation  of  the  chil- 
dren of  God. 


OF  THE  SYNODICAL  CONFERENCE.  127 

What  position  Christians  ought  to  maintain  to- 
ward the  existing  heterodox  Churches. 

As  no  person  is  licensed  to  speak  aught  but  the 
Word  of  God  in  the  Church  (i  Pet.  iv.  11),  and  no 
Christian  is  allowed  to  unite  with  a  teacher  who  in 
any  way  deviates  from  the  doctrine  revealed  in 
Holy  Scripture,  Christians  who  are  not  yet  connected 
with  heterodox  Churches,  should  az:oid  them,  and 
Christians  already  united  with  them,  should  come 
out  from  among  them.  It  is  not  according  to  the 
good pleas2ire  of  God — as  ni-odern  theologians  teach 
— that  sects  exist,  for  all  Christians  are  required  to 
agree  on  all  articles  of  faith  revealed  in  Holy 
Scripture  (i  Cor.  i.  10;  Eph.  iv.  3-6),  but  sects 
arose  and  exist  by  God's  forbearance  only,  like 
other  sins.  Sects  arise  and  continue,  not  for  the 
purpose  that  Christians  should  join  them,  but  for 
the  purpose  that  Christians  should  prove  their  al- 
legiance to  God  by  avoiding  them,  as  the  Scriptures 
explicitly  teach,  i  Cor.  xi.  19:  "There  must  be 
also  heresies  among  you,  that  they  which  are  ap- 
proved may  be  made  manifest  among  you." 

To  unite  v/ith  heterodox  Churches,  must  not  be 
excused  by  pointing  to  the  fact  that  many  dear 
children  of  God  are  found  among  them.  As  it  was 
not  lawful  for  the  Israelites  to  join  with  Absalom, 
although  two  hundred  men  out  of  Jerusalem  went 
with  the  rebel  ''in  their  simplicity"  (2  Sam.  xv. 
11),  even  so  it  is  not  la\vful  for  Christians  to  unite 
with   those   ecclesiastical    communities   that    rebel 


128        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

against  Christ  by  proclaiming  false  doctrines,  al- 
though many  Christians  "in  their  simplicity"  and 
by  mistake  have  joined  them. 

Here  the  question  may  be  answered  what  position 
a  Christian  should  hold  in  regard  to  the  so-called 
Four  Points. 

Chihas7n.  By  chiliasm  we  understand  the  doc- 
trine according  to  which  a  glorified  state  of  the 
Church  on  earth  in  a  millennial  reign  is  to  be  ex- 
pected. It  is  2,  false  doctrine,  as  it  contradicts  sev- 
eral clearly  revealed  truths,  especially  the  truth  that 
the  Churcii  on  earth  is  to  be  a  kingdom  subject  to 
the  cross  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  (Acts 
xiv.  22;  Luke  xviii.  8.)  It  is,  besides,  a  very  dan- 
gerous doctrine,  as  it  perverts  the  hope  of  the  Chris- 
tains,  inviting  them  to  hope  for  a  glorification  in 
this  world,  instead  of  in  the  world  to  come.  Con- 
sequently, chiliasm  must  not  be  treated  as  an 
"open  question,"  but  every  Christian,  every  con- 
gregation, and  every  ecclesiastical  body,  are  bound 
to  reject  the  chiliastic  opinion. 

Pulpit-fellowship.  All  Christians  are  commanded 
to  avoid  those  who  teach  doctrines  contrary  to  the 
vScriptures  (Rom.  xvi.  17);  teachers,  therefore,  who 
in  any  way  proclaim  false  doctrines,  are  not  to  be 
admitted  into,  but  to  be  excluded  from  our  pulpits. 
As  this  rule  is  taken  from  the  Word  of  God,  it  ad- 
mits of  no  exception,  but  applies  to  every  case  and 
occasion.  The  practice  of  pulpit-fellowship  with 
errorists  cannot  be  excused  on  the  plea  of  its  being 


OF  THR  SYNODIC AL  CONFERENCE      1 29 

demanded  by  love.  For  it  is  contrary  to  both  the 
love  toward  God  who  bids  us  ^' avoid'^  false 
teachers  and  not  to  invite  them  into  our  pulpits, 
and  the  love  toward  our  fellow-men,  as  it  is  our 
Christian  duty  to  warn  them  against  error,  and  not 
to  confirm  them  in  it.  ^Moreover,  it  is  patent  that 
by  the  practice  of  '*  exchanging  pulpits"  the  dis- 
sensions in  the  Church,  caused  by  false  teachers, 
are  not  removed,  but  continued  and  ratified. 

Altar-fellowship.  In  regard  to  altar-fellowship 
the  same  reasons  hold  good  which  forbid  Church- 
fellowship  with  errorists.  Altar-fellowship  cer- 
tainly is  Church-fellowship.  There  is,  however, 
an  additional  reason  to  be  noted  on  this  point. 
According  to  the  explicit  statement  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture till  such  as  are  not  able  to  "  discern  the  Lord's 
body,"  partake  unworthily  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
Consequently,  love  bars  us  from  admitting  to  our 
altars  Christians  w^ho  do  not  believe  the  real  and 
substantial  presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  in  the  Holy  Supper,  and,  therefore,  are  not 
able  to  discern  the  body  of  the  Lord.  This  rule 
too,  being  taken  from  the  Word  of  God,  admits  of 
no  exceptions.  To  say  that  making  exceptions 
should  be  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  individual 
pastor  or  congregation,  is,  in  fact,  granting  \ 
license  to  act  against  the  Word  of  God.  Sus- 
pension of  altar-fellowship  is  not  to  be  called  ex- 
communication. The  Lutheran  Church  denied 
altar-and  pulpit-fellowship  to  the  Reformed,  willi- 
9 


130        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

out  denying  that  there  are  Christians  among  the 
Reformed. 

Secret  societies.  Secret  societies,  such  as  Odd 
Fellows,  Free  Masons,  etc.,  are  incompatible  with 
the  Christian  Church.  For  in  these  societies  a  way 
\?>(iQ\\\\\\^\\^^^  of  obtaining  ^^  eternalhappiness^''''  not 
through  Christ,  however,  and  Him  crucified,  but  by 
"moral  education."  There  is  praying  also  in  the 
Lodges,  but  not  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ.  From 
this  it  appears — not  to  mention  the  ungodly  oaths 
and  other  objectionable  features  connected  with 
membership  in  the  Lodges — that  a  Christian  can 
not  enter  into  membership  with  secret  societies 
without  professing  a  false  way  to  heaven  and  par- 
ticipating in  a  false  worship,  and  thus  denying 
Christ,  man's  only  hope  for  salvation.  It  i6  the 
sacred  duty  of  the  Christian  Church  to  raise  her 
voice  against  secret  societies,  for  a  public  testimony; 
and  especially  for  the  purpose  of  regaining  such  of 
her  members  as  are  already  led  astray  by  the 
Lodges. 

OF   THE   MINISTERIAL   OFFICE. 

The  ministerial  office,  that  is,  the  office  of  the 
preaching  of  the  Word  and  the  administration  of 
the  Sacraments,  is  not  of  human  ordinance,  but  of 
divine  institution. 

As  it  is  God  who  instituted  the  ministerial  office, 
so  it  is  He  who  calls  certain  persons  to  this  office. 
Acts  XX.  28;  Eph.  iv.  8,  11,  12;  Matt.  ix.  38. 
Thus  far  all  parties  agree. 


OF  THE  SYNODIC  A  L  CONFERENCE.  I31 

But  through  wliom,  i.  e.,  what  human  agency, 
does  God  effect  his  call?  Here,  disagreement  be- 
gins. The  right  answer  is:  The  right  and  power  of 
electing  and  calling  ministers  of  the  divine  Word  is 
primarily  and  iniuiediately  granted,  not  to  the  pope, 
nor  to  bishops,  nor  to  the  ministry,  nor  to  a  Con- 
sistory, nor  to  the  Presbytery,  nor  to  a  civil  power 
of  any  form,  but  to  those  to  whom  ^//spiritual  power 
("Church-power")  originally  and  immediately  be- 
longs, namely,  the  congregation  of  believers.  As  it 
is  the  congregation  of  believers  that  has  the  keys 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  (Matt,  xvi,  19,  xviii.  18), 
that  is  primarily  commissioned  to  teach  all  nation-s 
and  to  administer  the  Sacraments,  (Matt,  xxviii. 
19,  20),  that  is  the  ''royal  priesthood"  for  showing 
forth  the  praises  of  him  who  hath  called  them  out 
of  darkness  into  his  marvelous  light,  so  it  is,  in  the 
very  nature  of  the  case,  the  congregation  of  be- 
lievers that  is  entrusted  with  the  power  of  appoint- 
ing ministers.  Hence,  the  Lutheran  Church  con- 
fesses in  the  Smalcald  Articles:  "Where  there  is  a 
true  Church,  there  must  be  the  right  to  elect  an^ 
ordain  ministers."  No  human  authority  can  re- 
move this  right  from  the  congregation  of  believers, 
as  it  was  granted  to  them  by  Christ  w^hen  they  be- 
came children  of  God  through  faith  in  Christ,  and 
is,  consequently,  inhering  in  their  being  Christians. 
The  congregation  of  believers  may,  of  course, 
transfer  the  exercise  of  this  right  to  one  or  more 
persons.     Ministers  called  by  individual  persons  or 


132        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

a  body  of  persons  in  the  name  of  the  congregation 
of  believers  have  received  a  valid  and  divine  call. 
But  it  ever  remains  true  and  must  never  be  forgot- 
ten, that  the  only  body  to  whom  the  right  and 
power  of  calling  ministers  is  origmally  entrusted, 
is  the  congregation  of  believers.  Whoever  is  called 
to  the  ministerial  office  by  this  body  either  directly 
or  indirectly,  has  received  a  divine  call;  whoever 
derives  from  other  sources  the  authority  to  teach 
publicly,  is  to  be  classed  with  those  of  whom  the 
Lord  says:  "I  have  not  sent  these  prophets,  yet 
they  ran  "  (Jer.  xxiii.  21).  All  this  may  be  summed 
up  thus:  the  ministerial  office  is  conferred  by 
God  upon  certain  persons  through  the  divinely  pre- 
scribed call  of  the  congregation,  the  congregation 
being,  by  the  gift  of  Christ,  the  original  possessor 
of  all  Church-power.  The  ministers  have  their 
office  from  Christ,  not  immediately,  however,  but 
mediately,  by  the  Church,  in  virtue  of  delegation 
through  the  call.  According  to  Holy  Scripture 
the  members  of  the  Christian  Church  among  them- 
selves constitute  a  spiritual  republic  (Matt,  xxiii. 
8).  As  the  office  of  a  Governor  or  President  in  a 
republic  is  not  a  personal  prerogative  of  an  individ- 
ual person  or  order  of  persons,  but  the  common 
property  of  the  whole  free  and  sovereign  nation, 
which  delegates  its  right  to  the  office  through  elec- 
tion to  a  certain  person:  even  so  the  ministerial 
office  and  all  spiritual  rights  are  the  common  prop- 
erty of  the  free  and  sovereign  people  of  believers 


OF   THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  133 

(Matt,  xxiii.  8;  i  Pet.  ii.  9,)  who  delegate  tlie 
divinely  instituted  office  of  the  ministry  through 
the  divinely  prescribed  call  to  certain  suitable  per- 
sons. The  ministers  are  not  only  servants  of 
Christ  (i  Cor,  iv.  i),  but  also  servants  of  the 
Church  (2  Cor.  iv.  5),  performing  the  functions  of 
the  office  in  the  place  and  name  of  the  Church,  and 
being  accountable  for  the  faithful  discharge  of  their 
duties  not  only  to  Christ,  but  also  to  the  congrega- 
tion (i  Colossians  iv.  17.) 

The  proper  answer  to  the  question  whether  it  is 
the  universal  or  the  /<?<r^/ Church  that  is  entrusted 
with  the  right  of  calling  ministers,  is  that  Christ 
clearly  ascribes  ''the  keys  of  the  kingdom,"  and, 
consequently,  the  right  to  appoint  ministers,  to  the 
local  Church.  For  it  is  the  local  Church  which 
Christ  addresses  when  He  says:  "Whatsoever  ye 
shall  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in  heaven;  and 
whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed 
in  heaven. "  "For  where  two  or  three  are  gathered 
together  in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of 
them,"  Matt,  xviii.  18,  20. 

Ordination.  It  is  the  call  of  the  congregation 
that  constitutes  ministers,  and  actually  confers  the 
ministerial  office.  Ordination  is  not  a  divine  ordin- 
ance, but  an  apostolic-ecclesiastical  institution.  It 
does  not  confer  the  ministry,  as  Papists  and  Roman- 
izing Protestants  assert,  but  is  only  a  public  testi- 
mony and  confirmation  of  the  call.  Ordination, 
therefore,  is  not  essential  to  the  validity  of  the 
ministerial  office. 


134        DISTINCTIVK    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

The  right  of  judging  on  qzcestiojis  of  doctrine  does 
not  rest  with  the  Church  at  large  only,  nor  with 
Synods  only  representing  the  Church  of  a  certain 
country,  nor  with  the  clergy  alone,  but  with  all  in- 
dividual Christians^  since  upon  all  Christians  is 
laid  the  duty  of  distinguishing  pure  teachers  from 
deceivers,  and  of  departing  from  error.  Matt.  vii. 
15;  Rom.  xvi.  17.  To  take  away  from  Christians 
the  right  of  judging  on  questions  of  doctrine,  is  an 
abominable  outrage,  and  the  origin  of  popery. 

Obedience  is  due  to  the  ministerial  office^  when- 
ever it  sets  forth  the  Word  of  God.  Beyond  these 
limits  obedience  must  neither  be  de7nanded  nor 
rendered.  A  minister  who  demands  obedience 
of  Christians  in  things  not  commanded  or  forbid- 
den by  the  Word  of  God,  puts  himself  in  the  place 
of  Christ,  for  it  is  Christ's  privilege  to  be  the 
Master  of  those  who  believe  in  Him  (Matt,  xxiii. 
8).  A  Christian  who  allows  men  to  bind  his  con- 
science beyond  the  Word  of  God,  by  this  very  fact 
and  in  this  regard  falls  away  from  Christ  as  his 
only  Master,  and  becomes  an  idolator,  paying  di- 
vine honors  to  mortal  man.  It  is  a  misuse  of  the 
Fourth  Commandment  when  ministers  in  demand- 
ing obedience  in  things  not  commanded  by  God 
refer  to  that  Commandment.  What  is  true  concern- 
ing ministers,  holds  good  also  in  regard  to  the  so- 
called  representative  Church,  namely,  in  regard  to 
Synods,  Church  Councils,  etc.  If  the  decisions  and 
injunctions  of  the  ^'Church"  are  identical  with  the 


OF   THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  135 

Word  of  God,  they  are  to  be  obeyed,  not  because 
they  are  the  decisions  of  the  Onirch^  but  on  account 
of  their  being  the  very  Word  of  God.  If  they  go 
beyond  these  limits,  either  by  declaring  to  be  true 
what  the  Scriptures  pronounce  to  be  false,  or  by 
making  obligatory  upon  the  consciences  of  Chris- 
tians what  is  a  matter  of  indifiference,  all  Christians 
are  bound  to  disregard  them.  There  is  absolutely 
no  authority  in  the  Church  beyond  the  Word  of 
God,  and  there  is,  consequently,  no  authority  on 
earth  that  could  make  the  least  thing,  not  pre- 
set ibed  by  Christ,  obligatory  upon  a  Christian's 
conscience.  The  pope,  says  Luther,  has  the  power 
of  laying  a  fast  upon  hunself^  but  not  on  some 
second  person  in  the  whole  world.  This  holds 
true  concerning  all  matters  of  indifference  and  with 
all  persons. 

But  as  there  are,  within  the  individual  congre- 
gations, many  things  to  be  determined  upon  which 
Christ  did  not  prescribe,  how  then  are  these 
things  to  be  arranged?  Not  by  the  clergy  alone 
commanding  the  Christian  people  what  to  do,  nor 
by  the  majority  prescribing  conscience-binding 
laws  to  the  minority,  nor  by  some  authority  out- 
side of  the  congregation  deciding  for  the  congrega- 
tion what  was  left  undecided  by  Christ,  but  by  the 
deliberations  and  the  mutual  agreement  of  the 
whole  congregation,  the  minority  submitting  to 
the  majority,  or  the  majority  to  the  minority,  ''for 
the  sake  of  charity  and   tranquillity,"  as  the  case 


136        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

and  occasion  may  require.  Matters  of  indifference 
are  easily  arranged  if  the  Christians  do  not  walk 
after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit.  When  they 
walk  after  the  flesh,  they  will  try  to  lord  over  their 
brethren  ;  wdien  they  walk  after  the  Spirit,  they 
are  always  ready  to  submit  to  them  for  charity's 
sake. 

Synods  must  not  claim  divine  authority  over  the 
cono^recfations  connected  with  them,  but  carefullv 
keep  within  the  sphere  of  advisory  bodies.  The 
local  congregation  is  the  highest  divinely  insti- 
tuted tribunal  in  the  Church,  as  is  seen  from  Matt, 
xviii.  17.  All  jurisdiction  exercised  over  congre- 
gations by  persons  outside  of  the  congregations  is 
of  iLHinaji  ordinance  only. 

OF    CHURCH-UNION. 

All  Christians  are  already  one  in  Christ.  Christ's 
promise  that  "there  shall  be  one  fold  and  one 
shepherd"  (John  x,  16),  has  been  in  the  course  of 
fulfillment  ever  since  the  times  of  the  apostles, 
whenever  a  soul  by  true  conversion  was  added  to 
the  communion  of  believers.  All  Christians  ac- 
tually agree  on  the  main  article  of  Christian 
religion,  namely,  on  the  article  that  they  have  for- 
giveness of  their  sins  through  faith  in  Christ 
alone,  and  not  by  their  own  works,  although  many 
of  them  are  in  external  connection  with  heterodox 
churches,  and,  by  infirmity,  err  in  some  parts  of 
doctrine.      For  it  is  this  faith  that  makes  a  man  a 


OF   THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  I37 

Christian  and  unites  him  with  the  spiritual  body 
of  Christ. 

Nevertheless,  it  is  a  deplorable  state  of  things, 
that  there  are  external  Christian  communities  dif- 
fering in  doctrine.  Sects,  as  stated  before,  do  not 
exist  according  to  God's  will  and  good  pleasure, 
but  only  by  God's  forbearance.  All  Christians, 
therefore,  should  be  desirous  of  a  reunion,  and 
earnestly  labor  for  the  same. 

But  the  union  sought  for  must  not  be  a  so-called 
organic  union  only,  but  a  union  in  faith  and  doc- 
trine. Christians  may  differ  and,  in  many  cases, 
owing  to  different  circumstances,  must  differ  as  to 
ceremonies,  external  organization,  etc.  But  there 
is  one  thing  concerning  w^hich  all  Christians  of  all 
times  and  of  all  countries  should  perfectly  agree — 
they  should  be  one  in  faith  and  doctrine.  "I  be- 
seech you,  brethren,"  St.  Paul  says,  "by  the 
name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  ye  all  speak 
the  same  thing,  and  that  there  be  no  divisions 
among  you,  but  that  ye  be  perfectly  joined  to- 
gether in  the  same  mind  and  in  the  same  judg- 
ment" (i  Cor.  i.  10). 

How  is  this  union  to  be  effected?  Sects  arose 
when  certain  persons  taught  contrary  to  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  others,  instead  of  rebuking  their  errors, 
united  with  them.  The  only  way,  therefore,  to 
cause  the  divisions  to  disappear,  is  to  remind  the 
Christians  of  their  duty  to  part  with  error,  and, 
consequently,  with  all  persons  that  persist  in  pro- 


138        DISTIKCTIVE    DOCTRINKS   AND   USAGES 

claiming  doctrines  contrary  to  Holy  Scripture,  and 
to  unite  with  those  that  teach  the  pure  word  of 
God.  Christians  should  never  agree  to  disagree 
on  any  article  of  faith,  but  earnestly  endeavor  to 
bring  about  an  agreement  on  all  doctrines  revealed 
in  Holy  Scripture.  Nothing  but  the  revealed 
truth,  and  the  whole  revealed  truth — that  is  the 
platform  which  God  has  made  for  the  Christian, 
and  which  every  Christian  is  commanded  to  stand 
upon.  An  agreement  on  a  more  or  less  compre- 
hensive collection  of  so-called  "fundamental  ar- 
ticles,'^ selected  by  man,  leaving  a  portion  of  the 
divinely  revealed  truth  to  the  discretion  of  the  dis- 
senting parties,  is  a  position  wholly  unbecoming 
to  Christians,  for,  not  to  deny,  but  to  confess  the 
Word  of  Christ,  is  their  duty  in  this  world. 

But  is  perfect  agreement  concerning  doctrine 
possible?  We  most  emphatically  answer:  it  is, 
as  the  Scriptures  are  perfectly  clear  on  all  articles 
of  faith,  every  article  of  faith  being  revealed  at 
least  somewhere  in  the  Scriptures  in  plain  and 
proper  words.  God,  by  graciously  giving  his  Word 
to  men,  did  not  propose  to  them  a  collection  of  rid- 
dles, but  made  his  word  to  be  "a  lamp  unto  our 
feet,  and  a  light  unto  our  path"  (Ps.  cxix.  105), 
"a  light  that  shineth  in  a  dark  place"  (2  Peter  i. 
19),  "making  wise  the  simple"  (Ps.  xix.  7). 
Erring  concerning  any  article  of  faith  is  impossible 
as  long  as  the  words  of  Scripture  are  retained  as 
they  read.     Ere  falling  into  error  is  possible,  the 


OF   THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  1 39 

plain  words  of  Scripture  must  have  either  been  en- 
tirely set  aside  or  twisted  from  their  natural  mean- 
ing according  to  human  reason  or  feelings. 

ON  "open  questions." 

There  are,  indeed,  "open  questions  "  if  this  term 
is  used  in  the  sense  of  "theological  problems." 
Such  are  all  those  questions  which  are  not  decided 
in  Holy  Scripture.  Open  questions  in  this  sense 
are  never  to  be  "closed,"  since  no  human  author- 
ity, be  it  called  "Church"  or  otherwise,  can 
supply  the  lacking  decision  of  Holy  Scripture. 
This  would  be  "adding  unto  the  Word  of  God" 
and  denying  that  the  written  Word  of  God  is  the 
only  rule  and  standard  of  faith  and  life.  Theolo- 
gians should  not  waste  their  time  and  energy  in 
trying  to  solve  questions  not  answered  by  the 
Bible.  On  the  other  hand,  all  doctrines  revealed 
in  Holy  Scripture  are  to  be  accepted  and  believed, 
for  the  very  reason  that  they  are  propounded  in 
Holy  Scripture,  no  matter  whether  "decided"  in 
the  Symbolical  Books  and  agreed  upon  by  the  the- 
ologians or  not.  To  declare  doctrines  revealed  in 
the  Bible  to  be  "open"  or  "free"  for  the  reason 
that  they  are  not  yet  "  symbolically  fixed  "  in  the 
Confessions  of  the  orthodox  Church,  or  not  yet 
accepted  by  all  orthodox  theologians,  would,  in 
fact,  be  the  same  as  to  put  the  Church,  her  Confes- 
sions and  theologians,  in  the  place  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture,   and    to    ascribe    to    the    Church    and    her 


140        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND    USAGES 

theologians  the  authority  of  establishing  articles 
of  faith.  We,  of  course,  insist  upon  accepting  the 
Confessions  of  the  lyUtheran  Church  without  ex- 
ception and  reserve,  as  we  are  convinced  that  all 
doctrines  propounded  by  them  (either  "ex  pro- 
fesso "  or  incidentally)  are  in  strict  accordance 
with  Holy  Scripture,  and  we,  moreover,  maintain 
that  a  qualified  acceptance  of  the  Confessions  of 
the  Lutheran  Church  makes  a  qualified  Lutheran. 
But  we,  nevertheless,  denounce  any  position  as  un- 
Lutheran  according  to  which  the  Confessions  are 
to  take  the  place  of  the  Scriptures. 

ON   SUNDAY. 

Sunday  in  the  New  Testament  is  not  instituted 
by  God^  as  was  the  Sabbath  in  the  Old  Testament; 
yea.  Sabbath,  or  any  other  day,  as  a  divine  insti- 
tution, is  clearly  abolished  in  the  New  Testament, 
as  St.  Paul  declares:  "Let  no  man  therefore  judge 
you  in  meat,  or  in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  a  holy- 
day,  or  of  the  new  moon,  or  of  the  Sabbath  days" 
(Colossians  ii.  16).  Hence  we  are  not  bound  by 
any  law  of  God  to  observe  either  Sunday  or  any 
other  day.  Sunday  belongs  to  the  Church  ordi- 
nances, and  is  to  be  classed  with  Christmas, 
Easter,  Pentecost,  and  other  Christian  holy  days. 
The  Christian  Church  has,  in  the  free  use  of  her 
liberty,  chosen  Sunday  for  a  day  of  divine  worship, 
because  some  time  or  other  must  be  selected  for 
hearing  the  public  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God. 


OF   THE  SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  141 

We  do  not  oppose  Sunday  lazvs  enacted  on  merely 
social  reasons;  for  public  welfare  demands  a  day  of 
rest  from  daily  labor  "that  both  man  and  beast 
might  be  refreshed,  and  not  exhausted  by  constant 
labor."  But  every  Christian  is  in  conscience 
bound  to  oppose  all  Sunday  laws  based  on  the  as- 
sumption that  Sunday  is  of  divine  ordinance,  for 
by  lending  support  to  this  assumption,  \ve  would 
participate  oi false  doctrine  and  entangle  Christians 
agfain  with  the  voke  of  bondap-e  wherefrom  Christ 
hath  made  them  free.  In  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion the  "Sunday  question"  is  summed  up  thus: 
"Those  who  are  of  opinion,  that  the  ordinance  of 
Sunday  instead  of  the  Sabbath  was  established  as  a 
thing  necessary,  err  very  much.  For  the  Holy 
Scripture  has  abolished  the  Sabbath,  and  teaches, 
that  all  ceremonies  of  the  old  law,  since  the  revela- 
tion of  the  Gospel,  may  be  discontinued.  And  yet 
as  it  was  necessary  to  appoint  a  certain  day,  so  that 
the  people  might  know  when  they  should  assem- 
ble, the  Christian  Church  ordained  Sunday  for  that 
purpose,  and  possessed  rather  more  inclination  and 
willingness  for  this  alteration,  in  order  that  the 
people  might  have  an  example  of  Christian  liberty^ 
that  they  might  know  that  neither  the  observance 
of  the  Sabbath,  nor  of  any  other  day,  is  necessary." 
The  "Sunday  question"  is  not  an  "open"  one, 
but  clearly  decided  by  the  Word  of  God. 


142        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 
ANTICHRIST. 

Holy  Scripture  speaks  of  ^'^  many  antichrists" 
(i  John  ii.  i8).  As  Christ  alone  is  to  rule  in  his 
Church  by  his  Word,  all  false  teachers  setting  forth 
in  the  Church  their  own  doctrine  instead  of 
Christ's  set  themselves  against  Christ,  attempt  to 
cast  off  the  authority  of  Christ  and  to  overthrow  his 
kingdom.  Hence  all  false  teachers  are  justly 
called  antichrists.  But  the  Scriptures  speak  also 
of  07ie  Antichrist  in  whom  the  principles  and  spirit 
of  the  many  antichrists  are  to  culminate.  This 
Antichrist,  commonly  called  the  great  Antichrist 
and  graphically  described  in  the  second  chapter  of 
the  second  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  we  believe 
to  be  the  pope  at  Rome,  the  papacy. 

To  this  doctrine,  so  clearly  stated  in  the  Confes- 
sions of  the  Lutheran  Church  and  once  generally 
accepted  by  all  Lutherans,  exception  is  taken  now. 
Modern  Lutheran  theologians,  although  acknowl- 
edging antichristian  traits  in  the  papacy,  are  wait- 
ing for  a  still  greater  foe  of  the  Christian  Church. 
But  it  is  from  ignorance  or  from  a  lack  of  due  con- 
sideration as  to  what  the  Christian  Church  really 
is,  when  the  pope  at  Rome  is  not  recognized  as  the 
greatest  possible  human  foe  of  the  Christian 
Church,  and  when  worldly  potentates  like  Napo- 
leon, or  even  Boulanger,  are  thought  of  as  the  An- 
tichrist. The  Christian  Church  is  the  communion 
of  believers,  that  is,  of  those  who  believe  that  they 
are  justified    and    saved    by  confiding   in  Christ's 


OF  THE  SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  143 

merit  alone  and  not  in  any  merits  of  their  own. 
It  is  this  faith  that  constitntes  the  very  essence  of 
the  spiritnal  life  of  a  Christian.  What  the  water  is 
for  the  fish  and  the  air  for  bodily  life,  that  is  re- 
liance on  God's  grace  in  Christ  alone  for  the  spirit- 
ual life  of  the  Christian.  As  soon  as  this  faith  is 
enkindled  in  their  hearts  they  become  Christians, 
as  long  as  this  faith  continues  in  them  they  remain 
Christians,  and  the  very  moment  this  faith  is  ex- 
tinguished in  them,  they  cease  to  be  Christians. 
Who,  therefore,  is  the  greatest  enemy  of  the  Chris- 
tians or  the  Christian  Church  ?  He  who  uses  every 
means  to  destroy  in  the  hearts  of  Christians  the 
faith  that  relies  on  Christ's  merit  alone.  But  this 
is  wdiat  Rome  is  engaged  in.  Rome  not  only  re- 
jects the  doctrine  of  justification  through  faith  in 
Christ  alone,  but  she,  in  the  Resolutions  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  curses  this  truth  by  wdiich  Chris- 
tians live.  And  she  not  merely  curses  it,  but  the 
whole  system  and  machinery  of  Romanism  has  the 
tendency  to  hinder  and  destroy  faith  in  Christ  and 
to  engender  trust  in  man's  own  w^orks.  It  was,  in- 
deed, a  fearful  thing  when  men  like  Nero  slaugh- 
tered thousands  of  Christians.  But  it  was  a  small 
affair  when  compared  with  what  Rome  does.  For 
Rome  incessantly  takes  the  spiritual  life  of  millions 
of  Christians  by  taking  from  them  faith  in  Christ  as 
the  only  Mediator  between  God  and  man,  not  to 
mention  here  that  Rome  also  drank  the  blood  of 
the  martyrs  of  Jesus  whenever  she  had  the  power 
to  do  so. 


144        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

Again,  Christians  are  to  be  ruled  by  Christ's 
word  alone  (John  viii.  31),  Christ  claiming  the 
prerogative  to  be  their  only  Master  (Matt,  xxiii. 
8).  But  the  Pope  at  Rome,  under  the  pretense  of 
being  Christ's  vicar  on  earth,  alters  and  annuls 
Christ's  Word  and  Commandments  at  his  pleasure, 
bearing  himself  as  if  he  were  a  God  on  earth. 

And  this  dreadful  and  blasphemous  work  Rome 
does  under  the  disguise  of  exquisite  holiness.  The 
infidels,  of  course,  blaspheme  Christ  too,  but  they 
do  it  openly,  and  all  Christians  know  that  they 
liave  to  beware  of  them.  Rome,  however,  rejects 
and  blasphemes  Christ  under  the  outward  appear- 
ance of  Christianity,  and  under  the  claim  of  being 
the  Church  without  which  there  is  no  salvation, 
sustaining  this  false  claim  by  all  manner  of  de- 
ceits, by  signs,  and  by  lying  wonders.  Thus  the 
papacy  is  the  greatest  possible  foe  of  Christ  and 
His  Church,  and  all  the  traits  which  in  2  Thess.  ii. 
are  ascribed  to  the  Antichrist,  that  he  is  to  arise 
in  the  Church,  exalting  himself  above  all  human 
authority,  assuming  to  himself  the  prerogative  of 
God,  and  sustaining  these  assumptions  "with  all 
power  and  signs  and  lying  wonders" — all  these 
traits  we  find  in  the  pope  at  Rome.  Hence,  we 
fully  and  heartily  indorse  the  doctrine  of  the 
Lutheran  Confessions,  that  the  pope  is  the  great 
Antichrist  of  whom  Scripture  has  prophesied.  In 
the  papacy  we  see  the  great  Antichrist  standing 
barely  and  squarely  in  the  sight  of  the  Christians 


OF   THR   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  145 

and  doing  his  fearful  work,  and,  therefore,  we  are 
not  looking  forward  to  any  other  great  Antichrist 
to  come  in  future  times. 

We  do  not,  of  course,  hold,  as  we  are  frequently 
represented,  that  this  doctrine  of  the  Antichrist  is 
a  fundamental  article  of  the  Christian  religion. 
For  man  is  saved  by  knowing  Christ,  not  by 
knowing  and  recognizing  Antichrist.  But  what 
we  hold  is  this:  every  Christian,  knowing  Christ 
well,  will  recognize  the  papacy  to  be  the  very 
Antichrist,  as  soon  as  he  becomes  thoroughly  ac- 
quainted with  the  teachings  and  doings  of  Rome. 
Especially  we  hold  those  theologians  to  be  rather 
poor  theologians  who,  knowing  the  doctrine  and 
practice  of  the  papacy,  fail  to  recognize  it  to  be  the 
true  Antichrist. 

ON   ABSOLUTION. 

Absolution  is  nothi-ng  else  than  the  Gospel  di- 
rected to  one  or  more  individual  persons  who  desire 
it.  By  the  word  of  absolution  the  forgiveness  of 
sin  is  really  offered  to  all  v.dio  hear  it,  and  actually 
conferred  on  all  who  receive  it  in  faith. 

It  is  for  a  two-fold  reason  that  to  many  Chris- 
tians the  practice  of  absolution  is  a  matter  of  great 
offense.  In  the  first  place,  they  confound  the 
divinely  instituted  absolution  (John  xx.  23;  Matt, 
xviii.  18;  xvi.  19)  with  the  Romish  caricature  of 
such  institution.  According  to  the  Romanists,  ab- 
solution is  an  act  which  only  the  Roman  priest 
10 


146        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

can  perform,  and  by  which  the  priest  sits  in  judg- 
ment on  the  sinner,  pardoning  and  condemning  at 
his  discretion.  This  doctrine,  indeed,  is  as  blas- 
phemous as  it  is  ridiculous,  but  it  has  nothing  in 
common  with  the  biblical  doctrine  held  by  the 
Lutheran  Church.  According  to  Holy  Scripture, 
absolution  is  not  a  power  vested  in  the  ministry  or 
any  certain  order  of  persons,  but  a  power  granted 
to  the  whole  Church,  i.  e.,  to  all  believers.  This 
is  clearly  seen  by  comparing  John  xx.  23,  Matt, 
xvi.  19,  with  Matt,  xviii.  18.  In  fact,  all  Christians 
when  they  console  one  another  with  the  Gospel, 
they  actually  absolve.  A  child  pronouncing  the 
words  of  the  Gospel  remits  sin  just  as  effectually 
as  a  bishop,  minister,  etc. 

But  the  main  reason  why  so  many  Christians 
take  offense  at  the  practice  of  absolution  is  to  be 
found  in  their  inadequate  ideas  as  to  what  the  Gos- 
pel of  Christ  properly  is.  Their  conceptions  of  the 
vicarious  work  of  Christy  and  consequently  of  the 
Gospel  also,  fail  to  come  up  to  the  biblical  stand- 
ard. They  think  that  Christ  has  only  brought 
about  so  much  for  us  that  we  now,  by  our  conver- 
sion, faith,  and  prayers,  render  God  fully  propi- 
tious, and  thus  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins.  Hence, 
they  conceive  the  Gospel  to  be  the  declaration  of 
certain  conditions  on  which  God  would  forgive  sin. 
With  many  Christians  and  teachers  the  Gospel  is  a 
\\\^x^  plan  to  save  sinners,  Christ  having  caused  in 
the  heart  of  God  a  certain  tendency  to  forgive  sin, 


OF  THE  vSYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  147 

men  cowplcluig  the  cliange  in  the  heart  of  God  by 
their  being-  sorry  for  their  sins,  by  their  praying  to 
God  for  forgiveness,  by  their  earnest  endeavors  to 
lead  a  better  life,  etc.  But  these  conceptions  both 
of  the  work  of  Christ  and  the  Gospel  are  altogether 
wrong.  Christ  has  already  perfectly  and  com- 
pletely reconciled  the  whole  world  unto  God,  and 
the  Gospel,  being  the  message  of  what  Christ  has 
done  for  mankind,  is  "  the  Word  of  reconciliation," 
viz. :  the  word  stating  that  God  is  reconciled — pe-y- 
fectly  and  co^npletely  reconciled — through  Christ  to 
the  whole  world  and  every  individual  sinner.  The 
Gospel  is  not  the  Word  which  teaches  how  men 
might  by  their  own  exertions  render  God  fully 
propitious,  but  the  Word  which  assures  us  that 
God  zvas  reconciled  to  all  men  through  the  vicar- 
ious sacrifice  of  Christ.  Therefore,  to  preach  the 
Gospel  does  not  mean  to  lay  before  men  a  mere 
plan  of  salvation,  or  to  declare  the  conditions  of 
forgiveness,  but  preaching  the  Gospel  is  preaching 
pardon  itself,  salvation  itself,  "remission  of  sins" 
itself  (Luke  xxiv.  47).  The  Gospel  is  "nothing 
else  than  a  great  letter  of  pardon  directed  to  the 
whole  world."  Hence  it  is  that  Luther  frequently 
says:  "A  minister  preaching  the  Gospel  can  not 
open  his  mouth  without  constantly  remitting  sin." 
Wherever  the  Gospel  is  proclaimed,  there  absolu- 
tion is  pronounced.  It  is  from  this  conception  of 
the  Gospel  that  the  Lutheran  practice  of  absohitio-n 
is  to  be  judged  a7id  understood.     It  should  be  borne 


148        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

in  mind  also  that  God  has  a^. ready  absolved  the 
whole  world  in  laying  the  sins  of  the  whole  world 
on  Christ  and  in  raising  up  Christ  from  the  dead. 
With  our  sins  upon  him  Christ  entered  into  the 
prison-house  of  death;  absolved  from  ou7'  sins  he 
was  set  free  in  his  resurrection.  Hence  it  is  seen 
that  the  resurrection  of  Christ  actually  involves  an 
absolution  of  the  whole  world,  and  the  absolution 
we  pronounce  is  nothing  but  a  repetition  or  echo 
of  what  God  has  long  since  pronounced. 

But  what  of  the  necessity  oi  faith?  Faith,  in- 
deed, is  necessary  on  the  part  of  man;  not,  how- 
ever, to  render  God  fully  propitious,  or  in  any  way 
to  merit  forgiveness  of  sin,  but  to  accept  of  the  for- 
giveness already  earned  by  Christ  and  now^  offered 
in  the  Gospel.  "Absolution" — says  Dr.  Walther 
—  "demands  faith,  and  faith  alone  receives  what 
is  offered  and  given  by  it;  neither  absolution,  nor 
any  means  of  grace,  operates  ex  opere  operato. " 

It  is  of  great  importance  to  maintain  this  true 
conception  of  the  Gospel,  viz.,  that  forgiveness  of 
sins  Exists  for  every  sinner  before  his  conversion 
and  faith.  For,  how  could  man  obtain  forgiveness 
of  sin  by  faith,,  i.  ^.,  by  laying  hold  on  it  by  faith, 
if  this  forgiveness  did  not  actually  exist  for  him  in 
Christ  and  were  not  offered  to  him  in  the  Gospel? 

To  this  doctrine  is  objected:  "  The  forgiveness  of 
sin  is  the  prerogative  of  God."  This  is  true! 
Whoever  is  not  absolved  by  God,,  remains  under 
the  burden  of  sin,  although  he  be  a  thousand  times 


OF   THE   SYNODIC  A  L   CONFERENCE.  149 

absolved  by  men.  But  now  the  question  arises 
whether  God  absolves  immediately^  e.  g.^  by  visi- 
ble apparition,  or  mediately,  by  using  certain 
means.  We  most  emphatically  deny  the  former 
and  affirm  the  latter.  God  performs  his  absolution 
through  the  Word  of  7'ecoiiciliation.  And  this  Word 
of  reconciliation  he  has  not  kept  for  himself,  but 
committed  to  his  Church  on  earth.  St.  Paul  after 
having  stated  "that  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling 
the  world  unto  himself,  not  imputing  their  tres- 
passes unto  them,"  immediately  adds:  "  and  hath 
committed  unto  us  the  word  of  reconciliation." 
This,  therefore,  is  the  state  of  things:  Christ  hav- 
ing committed  to  His  Church  the  Gospel,  thereby 
committed  to  her  the  right  and  enjoined  upon  her 
the  dut}^  of  forgiving  sin.  No  one  who  concedes 
the  former  can  consistently  deny  the  latter. 
Hence,  Christ  in  describing  the  agency  by  which 
sin  is  forgiven  (John  xx. ,  Matt,  xviii.,  Matt,  xvi.), 
names  the  congregation  of  believers:  "Whatso- 
ever ye  shall  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in 
heaven,"  and  "Whosesoever  sins  j^  remit,  they  are 
remitted  unto  them."  What  is  true  of  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Gospel,  is  true  also  of  the  administration 
of  the  Sacraments,  the  Sacraments  being  nothing 
but  the  "  visible  Gospel."  The  person  administer- 
ing the  Sacraments  is,  in  fact,  administering  ab- 
solution. The  person  saying  "I  baptize  you,"  at 
the  same  time  says  "  I  absolve  you."  Baptism  is 
a  private  absolution.     So  is  also  the  Lord's  Supper. 


150        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

Against  absohition^  7noreover^  is  objected:  "It  is 
impossible  to  believe  that  God  has  given  men  the 
power  of  forgiving  sin,  unless  he  has  given  them 
the  power  of  infallible  judgment."  This  ob- 
jection rests  on  the  false  supposition  that  absolu- 
tion is  a  decision  rendered  on  the  state  of  man's 
heart,  while  it  is  a  declaration  given  on  the  state 
of  Goo's  heart,  namely,  that  God  is  reconciled  to 
every  sinner  through  Christ.  God  being  perfectly 
reconciled  to  every  sinner  through  Christ,  as  Holy 
Scripture  reveals,  no  infallibility  whatever  is  re- 
quired on  the  part  of  man  to  pronounce  absolution, 
but  only  a  mouth  to  give  utterance  of  a  fact  clearly 
revealed  in  Holy  Scripture.  Absolution  is  founded 
on  two  facts,  first,  that  God  is  perfectly  reconciled 
through  Christ  to  every  sinner;  secondly,  that  God 
has  commanded  this  Gospel  to  be  preached  in  the 
world,  and  especially  to  the  penitent  sinners  who 
long  for  the  consolation  of  the  Gospel.  Absolution 
de7nands  faith  on  the  part  of  man,  yet  it  is  not 
based  upon  faith,  but  pronounced  for  the  purpose 
of  being  appropriated  hy  faith. 

From  the  Lutheran  Confessions  the  following 
statement  concerning  absolution  may  be  cited  here: 
The  power  of  the  keys  announces  to  us  the  Gospel^ 
through  absolution;  for  absolution  proclaims  peace 
to  the  soul,  and  is  the  Gospel  itself .  .  .  When  we 
hear  absolution,  that  is,  the  promise  of  divine 
grace^  or  the  Gospel^  our  hearts  and  consciences 
are  consoled.     Inasmuch  as  God  truly  grants  new 


OF   THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  I5I 

life  and  comfort  to  our  hearts  tJirougJi  the  Word^ 
our  sins  are  truly  remitted  here  on  earth  through 
the  power  of  the  keys,  so  that  we  are  released  from 
them  before  God  in  heaven;  as  we  find,  Luke  x.  16: 
"He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me."  We  should, 
therefore,  esteem  and  believe  the  words  of  absolu- 
tion no  less  than  the  clear  voice  of  God  from 
heaven.     (Apology,  N.  ]\I.  ed.  p.  236.) 

OF  JUSTIFICATION. 

By  justification  we  understand  the  remission  of 
sins.  Since  Christ  has  already  perfectly  acqim-ea 
foreiveness  of  sins  for  all  men,  and  since  this  for- 
giveness  is  offered  and  exhibited  to  men  through 
the  means  of  grace,  to  wit,  the  Gospel  and  the  Sac- 
raments: the  oiily  means  on  our  part  of  obtaining 
forgiveness  of  sins  and  salvation  is  \\\2it  faith  which 
accepts  of  the  promise  of  God.  All  works  and 
worthiness  of  our  own  are  entirely  excluded  as  a 
means  of  obtaining  remission  of  sins  or  justifica- 
tion. 

This  is  the  7nam  article  of  the  Christian  religion. 
It  is  by  this  article  that  the  Christian  religion  is 
distijigiiishcd  from  all  other  so-called  religions. 
There  are  only  two  essentially  different  religions  in 
the  world.  According  to  one,  justification  and 
salvation  is  obtained,  either  totally  or  partially,  by 
man's  own  works;  according  to  the  other,  justifica- 
tion and  salvation  is  obtained  without  works  by 
faith,  that  is,  by  merely  accepting  of  the  grace  of 


152        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

God  ill  Christ,  exhibited  in  the  Gospel  The  latter 
is  the  Christian  religion,  the  former  the  heathen  re- 
ligion in  its  various  forms. 

From  this  it  appears  that  by  corrupting  the 
article  of  justification  the  essential  feature  of  the 
Christian  religion  is  destroyed.  This  is  done  e.  g. 
by  syiiergism.  The  assertion,  that  conversion  and 
salvation  depends  not  only  upon  the  grace  of  God 
but  to  some  extent  also  on  the  conduct  of  man, 
overthrows  the  article  of  justification,  destroys  the 
essential  character  of  the  Christian  religion,  and 
places  it  on  equal  footing  with  the  heathen  relig- 
ions. 

OF   CONVERSION. 

As  natural  man  is  dead  in  sin  (Hph.  ii.  i),  yea 
enmity  against  God  (Rom.  viii.  7),  his  coming  to 
God  or  his  conversion  is  solely  the  work  of  God 
who  through  the  means  of  his  Word  produces  a 
new  spiritual  life  and  creates  a  new  willing  heart. 
The  Scriptures  explicitly  declare  that  man's  con- 
version is  accomplished  by  the  same  iiijinite  power 
by  which  God  created  natural  light  out  of  darkness 
(2  Cor.  iv.  6),  and  raised  Christ  from  the  dead 
(Eph.  i.  19,  20). 

Hence  there  is  no  co-operation  whatever  on  the 
part  of  man  towards  his  conversion,  but  man  is 
only  the  object  that  is  to  be  converted.  There  are 
not  three ^  but  only  tzvo  causes  of  conversion:  The 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  Word  of  God;  by  adding  a 
third  Q?c\\s^^  to  wit,  the  will  of  man,  or  by  asserting 


OF  THE   SYNODICAI.   CONFERENCE.  1 53 

that  conversion  depends  not  only  on  divine  grace, 
but  to  some  extent  also  on  man's  conduct,  syner- 
gistic error  is  taught. 

The  converting  or  regenerating  grace,  however, 
is  not  irresistible.  IVIan  can  offer  resistance  to 
God's  earnest,  regenerating  grace,  and  \\\\\^ prevent 
conversion,  as  Holy  Scripture  clearly  teaches 
(Acts  vii.  51;  Matt,  xxiii.  37).  But  man  can  not 
projnote  his  conversion.  He  is  not  able  to  refrain 
from  resisting  the  grace;  non-resistance  must  be 
effected  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  From  man's  ability 
to  "behave  evil''  towards  the  Gospel  (Matt,  xxiii. 
2)"])  his  ability  to  refrain  from  resistance,  or  to 
**  behave  well  "  toward  converting  grace  must  not 
be  inferred  (i  Cor.  ii.  14).  Hence  it  is  rightly  said 
non-conversion  depends  upon  man's  evil  condjict^ 
but  it  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  Scriptures  to 
say  that  conversion  also  depends  on  man's  good 
conduct.  Hodge  (Systematic  Theology  ii.  649)  en- 
tirely misstates  the  Lutheran  doctrine  when  he 
says:  According  to  the  Lutherans,  "  the  fact  that 
one  man  is  converted  under  the  call  of  the  Gospel 
and  not  another,  that  one  accepts  and  another  re- 
jects the  offered  mercy,  is  to  be  referred  solely  to 
the  fact  that  one  does,  and  the  other  does  not  resist 
that  influence."  Lutherans  who  are  in  accordance 
with  the  Lutheran  Confessions  will  say:  The  fact 
that  one  man  is  converted  under  the  call  of  the 
Gospel,  is  to  be  referred  solely  to  the  grace  of  God, 
non-resisting  not  being  antecedent  but  consequent 


154        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTls'-INKS   AND   USAGES 

to  the  operation  of  grace.  The  fact,  however,  that 
another  man  is  not  converted,  is  to  be  referred 
solely  to  man's  voluntary  resistance  (Formula  of 
Concord,  S.  D.,  XL  §§  57-64,  p.  716). 

To  this  position  the  following  objection  is  urged: 
If  conversion  is  exclusively  the  effect  of  divine 
grace,  or  if  conversion  depends  upon  giace  only 
and  in  no  way  on  man's  "conduct,"  "self-deter- 
mination," etc.,  then  God  appears  to  pass  by  some 
men  with  his  converting  or  regenerating  grace. 
We  hold  fast,  however,  that  a  converted  person  is 
such  only  by  the  grace  of  God;  while  on  the  con- 
trary, an  unconverted  person  is  such  by  his  own 
fault,  because  he  wantonly  resists  the  grace  of  God. 
We  have  here  before  us  a  great  mystery.  We,  of 
course,  know  of  two  ways  by  which  we  might  ex- 
plain away  this  mystery.  We  might  have  recourse 
to  an  absolute  decree  of  reprobation  and  say:  God's 
converting  grace  is  not  universal;  consequently 
only  some  men  are  converted.  But  this  way  of 
solving  the  mystery — the  Calvinistic  way — is  con- 
trary to  the  Scriptures  (i  Tim.  ii.  4;  Acts  xiii.  46; 
vii.  51);  hence  we  can  not  make  use  of  it.  Or  we 
might  say:  conversion  does  not  depend  upon  grace 
alone,  but  to  some  extent  also  on  man's  conduct, 
self-determination,  etc.,  and  this  is  the  reason  why 
not  all  men  are  converted.  But  as  this  way  of  ex- 
plaining the  mystery — the  synergistic  way — is  also 
at  war  with  the  clear  statements  of  Scripture,  we 
leave  the  mystery  unsolved,  hoping  for  a  solution 


OF   THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENXE.  1 55 

ill  the  world  to  come.  In  the  ineaiitiine  we  abide 
by  the  Word  of  God  spoken  through  Hosea:  "O 
Israel,  thou  hast  destroyed  thyself]  but  in  me  is 
thine  help  "  (Hosea  xiii.  9). 

OF   PREDESTINATION. 

The  distinguishing  feature  of  our  doctrine  con- 
cerning predestination  or  election  may  be  briefly 
stated  thus:  We  differ  from  all  those  who  in  any 
way  limit  either  universal  ox  free  grace. 

There  is  no  predestination  to  death.  As  to  uni- 
versal grace  we  teach  that  God's  earnest,  sincere, 
and  efficacious  grace  extends  to  all  men  alike,  in 
such  a  manner,  that  all  those  who  remain  unbe- 
lievers, remain  such  solely  by  their  own  fault. 
We,  therefore,  reject  the  distinction  between 
common  grace  and  efficacious  (regenerating)  grace, 
the  former  extending  to  all  men,  the  latter  being 
granted  to  the  elect  only.  For  the  grace  granted 
to  those  who  remain  unbelievers  and  against  which 
the  unbelievers  harden  themselves.  Holy  Scripture 
clearly  describes  as  sincere  and  efficacious  grace 
(Acts  xiii.  46;  Matt,  xxiii.  2)7]  Acts  vii.  51).  Even 
those  passages  of  Scripture  that  treat  of  obditration 
inflicted  by  God  on  some  persons,  do  not  prove  that 
God  passed  them  by,  but  rather  that  He  visited 
these  with  his  saving  grace,  for  obduration  is  rep- 
resented by  Holy  Scripture  as  a  punishment  for 
C07itemning  and  resisting  the  grace  of  God.  Yea, 
according  to  Scripture,  some  of  those  who  are  ac- 


156        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES    AND    USAGES 

tually  lost,  enjoy  even  a  more  abundant  measure 
of  grace  than  some  of  those  who  are  actually  saved 
(Matt.  xii.  41).  We  teach  and  confess  that  dam- 
nation comes  upon  men  not  for  want  of  grace  on 
the  part  of  God,  but  for  contempt  of  grace  on  the 
part  of  men  (Acts  xiii.  46;  Matt.  xi.  25).  There 
are,  indeed,  some  historical  facts  (e.  g.,  that  many 
nations  are  destitute  of  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel)  which  present  a  seeming  contradiction  to 
the  universality  of  grace.  But  we  deem  Holy  Scrip- 
ture to  be  clearer  than  history.  In  spite  of  all 
seeming  contradictions,  we  abide  by  the  clear 
statements  of  the  Scripture  asserting  God's  earnest, 
sincere,  and  efficacious  grace  to  be  universal  (i 
Tim.  ii.  4;  Ez.  xxxiii.  11).  There  is  no  predes- 
tination to  unbelief  and  damnation. 

There  is  a  predestination  to  salvation.  Holy 
Scripture,  although  utterly  silent  on  a  predestina- 
tion to  death,  clearly  teaches  a  predestination  to 
salvation^  pertaining  not  to  all  men,  but  only  to 
those  who  are  actually  saved.  Holy  Scripture 
clearly  reveals  the  fact  that  all  those  who  are 
actually  converted,  preserved  in  faith,  and  saved, 
by  the  divinely  established  common  way  of  salva- 
tion, are  from  eternity  in  God's  counsel  elected 
and  predestined  to  be  saved  in  this  way  and  in  this 
order,  Eph.  i.  3-6;  2  Thess.  ii.  13,  14.  ^'The 
eternal  election  or  predestination  of  God" — the 
Formula  of  Concord  says — "that  is,  the  ordaining 
of  God  unto  salvation,  does  not  pertain  both  to  the 


OF   THE   SYNODIC AL   CONFERENCE.  1 57 

good  and  the  bad,  but  only  to  the  children  of  God, 
who  were  elected  and  ordained  to  eternal  life,  be- 
fore the  foundation  of  the  world,  as  Paul,  Eph.  i. 
4,  5,  declares:  "He  hath  chosen  us  in  Christ 
Jesus,  and  predestinated  us  unto  the  adoption  of 
children." 

Caiiscs  of  ete^'iial  election,  God  elected  those 
who  are  elected  solely  out  of  His  mercy  and  on  ac- 
count of  Chrisfs  7nerit  earned  for  all.  Election 
has  not  taken  place  on  account  of  anythi7jg  good^ 
even  not  on  account  oi  faith ^  which  God  foresaw 
in  the  elect.  According  to  the  universal  Christian 
order  of  salvation,  all  those  who  are  actually  con- 
verted and  saved,  are  indebted  for  their  conversion 
and  salvation  to  God's  free  grace  in  Christ,  their 
conversion  and  salvation  being  in  no  way  secured 
or  promoted  by  anything  good  found  in  themselves. 
Even  so  their  eter^ial  electio7i  to  conversion  and 
salvation  is  not  dependent  on  or  conditioned  by 
anything  good  found  in  themselves,  be  it  called 
*' good  works,"  or  "  good  conduct,"  or  "self-de- 
termination," etc.,  but  eternal  election  solely 
flows  from  God's  free  grace  in  Christ.  This 
doctrine,  and  none  other,  is  revealed  in  Holy 
Scripture.  Holy  Scripture  not  only  teaches  that 
God  has  chosen  us  in  Christy  according  to  the  good 
pleasiire  of  his  zuill,  to  the  praise  of  the  glory  of  his 
grace  (Eph.  i.  4-6),  but  expressly  denies  that 
there  be  a  cause  of  election  /;/  man;  "not  accord- 
ing to  our  works,  but  according  to  his  own  purpose 


158        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

and  grace,  which  was  given  us  in  Christ  Jesus  be- 
fore the  world  began"  (2  Tim.  i.  9;  John  xv.  16.) 
In  this  sense  St.  Paul  calls  election  "the  election 
ofg-race^^''  adding  for  the  purpose  of  explanation  as 
to  what  "grace"  is:  "and  if  by  grace,  then  is  it 
no  more  of  works;  otherwise  grace  is  no  more 
grace"  (Rom.  xi.  5,  6).  The  Lutheran  Church 
confesses  concerning  the  causes  of  election:  "The 
following  doctrine  is  false  and  erj'oneo2is^  namely, 
that  not  the  mercy  of  God  alone,  and  the  most 
holy  merit  of  Christ  are  the  cause,  but  that  in  21s 
also  there  is  a  cause  of  the  election  of  God,  on  ac- 
count of  which  God  has  elected  us  to  everlasting 
life."  This  is  Lutheran  doctrine!  The  doctrine 
that  God  elected  on  account  of  foreseen  "good  con- 
duct," "self-determination,"  "non-resistance," 
etc.,  we  hold  to  be  both  un-Lutheran  and  un- 
christian, denying  free  grace,  and  thus  falsifying 
the  Christian  way  of  salvation. 

Relation  of  eternal  election  to  the  faith  of  the  elect. 
In  the  decree  of  eternal  predestination  t\\Q  faith  of 
the  elect  is  not  pj^esupposed  (as  is  assumed  by  the 
theory  that  predestination  took  place  "in  foresight 
of  faith),"  but  iitcliided.  For  God  did  not  first 
elect  them  to  salvation  absolutely,  and  after  that 
decree  to  grant  them  faith  as  the  means  of  obtain- 
in  e  salvation,  but  when  God  elected  them  He  at 
the  same  time  and  in  the  same  decree  decreed  to 
grant  them  faith  and  perseverance  in  faith.  As 
God  in  tirne  unites  His  children  to  himself  by  giv- 


OF  THE  SYNODICAL   COXFERKNCR.  I59 

ing-  them  faith,  so  in  eteruiiy  he  united  His  chil- 
dren to  himself  by  decreeing  to  give  th.em  faith. 
The  very  substance  of  eternal  election  consists  in 
this,  that  God  decreed  to  grant  his  children  faith  in 
Christ  and  preserve  them  therein.  "God  took" 
— the  Formula  of  Concord  says — "so  deep  an  in- 
terest in  the  conversion,  righteousness,  and  salva- 
tion of  each  Christian,  and  so  faithfully  provided 
for  these,  that  before  the  foundation  of  the  world, 
in  His  counsel  and  purpose,  He  ordained  the  man- 
ner in  which  He  would  bring  me  to  salvation,  and 
preserve  me  there."  If,  therefore,  the  question  be 
asked  whether  the  faith  that  is  found  in  the  elect  in 
time,  in  the  order  of  thought  precedes  their  eternal 
election  as  a  cause,  condition,  etc.,  or  follows  after 
it  as  a  result,  the  latter  must  be  affirmed  and  the 
former  denied.  For  in  all  passages  of  Scripture 
treating  of  this  matter,  not  only  faith,  but  the  en- 
tire state  of  grace  with  all  the  spiritual  blessings 
bestowed  upon  the  Christians  in  time,  are  repre- 
sented ViS  flowing  from  their  eternal  election,  Eph. 
i.  3-5:  "Blessed  be  the  God  and  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  blessed  us  with  all  spiritual 
blessings  in  heavenly  places  in  Christ:  According 
as  he  hath  chosen  us  in  him  before  the  foundation 
of  the  world,  that  we  should  be  holy  and  without 
blame  before  him  in  love:  Having  predestinated  us 
unto  the  adoption  of  children'^  etc..  Acts  xiii.  48: 
"as  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life  believed. 
See:  2  Tim.    i.  9;  2  Thes.    ii.    13,    14;  Rom.   viii. 


l6o        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

28-39.  Hence  the  Formula  of  Concord  states: 
"  The  eternal  election  of  God  not  only  foresees  and 
foreknows  the  salvation  of  the  elect,  but  through 
his  gracious  will  and  good  pleasure  in  Christ  Jesus ^ 
is  also  the  cmise  which  procures,  works,  facilitates, 
and  promotes  our  salvation  and  whatever  pertains 
to  it."  And  it  is  this  relation  of  the  eternal  elec- 
tion to  their  faith  and  continuance  in  faith  that  the 
Christians  find  such  a  precious  consolatioii  in  the 
doctrine  of  election,  as  the  Formula  of  Concord 
puts  it:  "  This  doctrine  also  affords  the  eminent  and 
precious  consolation,  that  God  took  so  deep  an  in- 
terest in  the  conversion,  righteousness,  and  salva- 
tion of  each  Christian,  and  so  faithfully  provided 
for  these,  that  before  the  foundation  of  the  world, 
in  His  counsel  and  purpose,  He  ordained  the  man- 
ner in  which  He  would  bring  me  to  salvation,  and 
preserve  me  there;  again,  that  he  wished  to  secure 
my  salvation  so  truly  and  firmly,  that  in  his  eternal 
purpose,  which  cannot  fail  or  be  overthrown,  he 
decreed  it,  and  to  secure  it,  placed  it  in  the  omnip- 
otent hands  of  our  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,  out  of 
which  none  shall  pluck  us,  John  x.  28.  For,  if 
our  salvation  were  committed  unto  us,  it  migfht 
easily  be  lost  through  the  weakness  and  wickedness 
of  our  flesh,  or  be  taken  and  plucked  out  of  our 
hands,  by  the  fraud  and  power  of  the  devil  and  of 
the  world." 


OF  THE  SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  l6l 

OBJECTION   TO   THIS    DOCTRINE. 

To  this  doctrine  the  following  objection  is  made 
by  Calvinists:  To  affirm  an  election  to  salvation, 
and  to  deny  an  election  to  death,  is  an  "illogical" 
position,  according  to  the  rules  of  human  reason. 
We  reply  that  we  are  well  aware  of  this,  and, 
morever,  that  we  know  all  the  means  employed 
both  by  Calvinists  and  Synergists,  to  remedy  this 
"inconsistency."  But  this  illogical  position  is 
that  of  the  Scripture.  Holy  Scripture  clearly 
teaches  a  predestination  to  salvation,  which  is  a 
cause  of  the  conversion  and  salvation  of  the  elect; 
but  it  does  not  mention  a  preterition  or  predestina- 
tion to  death,  which  is  a  cause  of  the  unbelief  and 
damnation  of  those  who  perish.  This  is  clearly 
seen  from  Acts  xiii,  48  compared  with  v.  46. 
Verse  48  we  hear  of  believing  Gentiles^  and  their 
faith  is  referred  to  their  eternal  election:  "As 
many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life  believed." 
Verse  46  we  hear  of  unbelieviiig  Jews^  but  their  un- 
belief is  not  referred  to  an  eternal  predestination 
to  unbelief  and  death,  or  to  a  lack  of  grace  on  the 
part  of  God,  but  solely  to  the  Jews'  wailful  resist- 
ance to  God's  sincere  and  efficacious  grace;  for 
Paul  and  Barnabas  address  the  Jews  thus:  "See- 
ing ye  put  it  (the  Word  of  God)  from  you,  and 
judge  yourself  unworthy  of  everlasting  life,  lo,  we 
turn  to  the  Gentiles."  It  is  sound  theology  to 
speak  where  Scripture  speaks,  and  to  be  silent 
where  Scripture  is  silent. 
II 


l62        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

The  Synergists  urge  the  objection:  If  you  insist 
upon  the  grace  of  God  and  the  merit  of  Christ  as 
being  the  only  causes  of  eternal  election,  denying 
that  election  was  also  on  account  of  man's  fore- 
seen "good  conduct,"  "self-determination,"  etc., 
you  will  be  forced  to  admit  that  God's  sincere  and 
efficacious  grace  is  not  universal.  This  conclu- 
sion, however,  we  do  not  admit,  since  Scripture 
does  not  admit  it.  Holy  Scripture,  in  revealing 
God's  eternal  election,  never  makes  it  dependent  on 
man's  "good  conduct,"  etc.,  but  merely  on  God's 
free  grace  in  Christ.  Scripture  at  the  same  time 
maintains  the  universality  of  grace.  x\nd  so  do 
we,  maintaining  unimpared  both  free  and  univer- 
sal  grace. 

But  finally  our  doctrine,  to  zvit^  that  election  "is 
also  the  cause  which  procures  and  promotes  our 
salvation  and  whatever  pertains  to  it,"  is  charged 
with  introducing  a  tzvofold  way  of  salvation,  the 
way  oi grace  pertaining  to  all  men,  and  the  way  of 
election  pertaining  to  those  only  who  are  actually 
saved.  In  answering  this  objection,  we  might 
simply  refer  to  Holy  Scripture,  which  plainly  as- 
serts election  to  be  a  cause  of  the  salvation  of  the 
elect.  But  by  duly  considering  the  matter  it  is 
easily  understood  that  we  do  not  introduce  two 
ways  of  salvation,  but  maintain  the  one  universal 
way  of  grace  in  regard  to  the  elect  also.  For  it  is 
one  and  the  same  efficacious,  saving  grace  by 
which  the  children  of  God  are  saved,  and  against 


OF   THE  SYNODICAL  CONFERENCE.  163 

which  the  children  of  unbelief  harden  themselves. 
And  as  the  children  of  God  during  this  life  are 
brought  to  conversion,  justification,  sanctification, 
etc.,  out  of  pure,  free  grace  in  Christ  without  any 
merits  of  their  own,  even  so  they  ixr^from  eternity 
elected  to  salvation  and  whatever  pertains  to  it,  not 
in  consideration  of  any  good  conduct  found  with 
them,  but  out  of  mere  grace  in  Christ.  Hence  the 
one  way  of  grace  is  not  destroyed  by  this  doc- 
trine, but  rather  confirmed  by  it,  as  the  Formula 
of  Concord  expressly  remarks:  "It  confirms  \\\q^\. 
forcibly  the  article,  that  we  are  justified  and  saved 
hy  pure  grace  for  the  sake  of  Christ  alone,  without 
any  of  our  works  and  merit."  But  when  it  is  af- 
firmed that  conversion  and  salvation  do  not  depend 
on  grace  only,  but  to  some  extent  on  man's  conduct 
also,  and,  consequently,  that  eternal  election  also 
took  place  in  consideration  or  foresight  of  this  con- 
duct of  man,  then,  indeed,  the  one  old  Christian 
way  of  salvation  is  entirely  abandoned  and  a  new 
way  of  salvation  is  introduced,  altogether  difierent 
from  the  revealed  way  of  grace. 

The  mystery  to  be  acknoiuledged  in  this  doctrine. 
There  are  some  things  in  this  doctrine  which 
we  know,  and  there  are  others  which  we  know 
not.  We  exactly  know  the  reason  why  those 
who  are  actually  saved,  are  elected,  brought  to 
faith  and  preserved  in  it.  It  is,  so  Scripture 
clearly  reveals,  out  of  God's  pure,  free  mercy  in 
Christ.     We  also  know  the  reason  why  those  who 


164        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

perish  are  not  converted  or  not  preserved  in  faith, 
and  thns  go  to  perdition.  It  is,  as  Scripture  like- 
wise plainly  teaches,  from  their  own  fault,  namely, 
from  their  obstinate  resistance  to  the  saving  grace 
of  God.  But  we  do  not  know  the  reason  why  one 
person  in  preference  to  another  is  converted  and 
saved,  as  all  nieii  by  nature  are  equally  guilty  and 
dead  in  siJt.  By  acknowledging  a  mystery  right 
here  we  must  not  be  charged  with  Cryptocalvinism. 
For  this  and  none  other  is  the  doctrinal  position  of 
the  Lutheran  Church.  The  Formula  of  Concord 
stating  the  case  thus:  "  that  God  gives  his  Word  to 
one  region,  but  not  to  another;  or  that  one  man  is 
hardened,  blinded,  and  given  over  to  a  reprobate 
mind,  but  that  another,  though  equally  guilty,  is 
converted  to  God,"  refers  us  to  Rom.  xi,  33,  34: 
"O  the  depth  both  of  the  wisdom  and  knowledge 
of  God!  how  unsearchable  are  his  judgments,  and 
his  ways  past  finding  out!  For  who  has  known 
the  mind  of  the  Lord?"  The  same  position  is,  as 
with  one  voice,  avowed  by  the  great  Lutheran 
theologians  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Martin 
Chemnitz  e.  g.^  writes  thus:  "Our  Catechism,  in 
the  third  article  of  our  Christian  faith,  says  that 
by  his  own  reason  or  strength  man  cannot  believe 
in,  or  come  to  Jesus  Christ,  but  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  must  bring  him  to  such  i2AW\^  for  faith  is  a 
gift  of  God ;  how^  theft ^  is  it  that  God  does  not  be- 
stow such  faith  upon  the  heart  of  fudas^  so  that  he 
also  could  have  believed  that   Christ   could   help 


OF   THE   SYNODICAL   CONFERENCE.  1 65 

him?  Here  we  vnist  restrain  our  questions  and 
say  (Rom.  xi.):  'O  the  depth  of  the  riches  both 
of  the  wisdom  and  knowledge  of  God!  how  un- 
searchable are  His  judgments,  and  His  ways  past 
finding  out!'  We  are  7ieither  able^  nor  bidden  to 
search  this  out,  and  must  not  be  absorbed  in  such 
thoughts."  The  mystery  which  the  Lutheran 
Church  acknowledges  at  this  point  may  only  be 
solved  either  by  denying  with  the  Calvin ists 
God's  universal  grace,  or  by  denying  with  the 
Synergists  God'sy;'^?^  grace,  as  was  shown  before. 

As  to  the  dogmatical  phrase  (which  was  intro- 
duced into  the  Lutheran  Church  hy  Aegidius  Hun- 
iiius)  that  election  has  taken  place  "in  view^  of 
faith,"  we  hold,  in  the  first  place,  that  it  is  not 
taken  from  the  Holy  Scriptures.  In  the  passage 
Rom.  viii.  29:  "whom  he  did  foreknow,  he  also 
did  predestinate,"  foreknow  does  not  denote  the 
simple  foreknowledge  of  God — for  thus  a  universal 
election  w^ould  result,  as  God's  simple  foreknowl- 
edge extends  to  all  men — but  foreknow  here  is  used 
in  the  sense  of,  "to  appropriate,  to  make  his  own  be- 
forehand," as  knoiv  2A\d!i  foreknow  TM^w^^^  in  other 
passages  of  Scripture,  e.  g. ,  Amos  iii.  2:  "You  only 
— O  children  of  Israel — have  I  known  of  all  the 
families  of  the  earth."  See  Rom.  xi.  2;  Gal.  iv. 
9;  Ps.  i.  6.  Hence  the  Formula  of  Concord  para- 
phrases Rom.  viii.  29,  30,  thus:  "Whom  He  did 
predestinate,  elect  and  ordain,  them  He  also  called." 
In  the  second  place,  w^e  hold,  that  the  phrase  "in 


1 66        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

view  of  faith  "  is  not  found  in  the  Lutheran  Confes- 
sions; in  the  third  place,  that  it  does  not  solve  the 
mystery,  if  at  the  same  time  the  biblical  doctrine  be 
maintained  that  faith  is  a  free  gift  of  grace,  and 
in  no  respect  man's  own  work;  in  the  fourth  place 
that,  if  the  phrase  "  in  view  of  faith  "  be  exchanged 
for  ^'in  view  of  man's  conduct^''''  "in  view  of  man's 
self-decision^''^  etc.,  the  mystery,  indeed,  is  solved, 
but  by  the  key  of  synergisin.  The  Lutheran 
grounds  are  entirely  abandoned.  For  the  Luth- 
eran Church  confesses:  "The  following  doctrine  is 
false  and  erroneous,  namel}',  that  not  the  mercy  of 
God  alone,  and  the  most  holy  merit  of  Christ  are 
the  cause,  but  that  i7i  ns  also  there  is  a  cause  of  the 
election  of  God,  on  account  of  which  God  has  elec- 
ted unto  everlasting  life." 

Asstu^ance  of  elcciio7i.  That  a  believing  Chris- 
tian can  become  and  be  certain  of  his  eternal  elec- 
tion, is  a  matter  of  course  with  Holy  Scripture,  for 
Holy  Scripture  uses  eternal  election  as  a  means  to 
comfort  the  Christians  in  their  temptations  and 
tribulations;  for  instance,  Rom.  viii.  33:  "Who 
shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect?" 
As  to  the  quality  or  character  of  certainty,  it  is 
best  described  as  a  certainty  oi  faith ^  for  it  results, 
not  from  searching  into  the  secret  counsel  of  God, 
nor  from  hearing  the  law  and  its  comminations, 
but  by  attending  to  and  believing  the  Gospel  of 
Christy  in  whom  eternal  election  has  taken  place  in 
eternitv  and  is  now  revealed  in  time. 


The  United  Synod  in  the  South. 

BY 

REV.  EDWARD  T.  HORN,  D.  D. 


THE  name  The  United  Synod  of  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  in  the  South  is  a  territorial 
designation.  The  other  great  divisions  of  the  Lu- 
theran Church  in  this  country  are  marked  by  doc- 
trinal or  historical  peculiarities;  the  General  Synod, 
for  instance,  by  the  limitation  of  its  confession  to 
the  Augsburg  Confession  and  its  endeavor  to  com- 
prehend on  that  basis  all  variations  on  minor 
points  of  belief,  and  also  by  the  fact,  in  relation  to 
other  bodies,  that  it  is  a  predominantly  English 
body.  The  General  Council,  occupying  almost  the 
same  territory  as  •  the  General  Synod,  embraces 
German  Synods  and  English  and  Scandinavian, 
and  acknowledges  certain  fundamental  principles 
which  confess  the  whole  body  of  Symbolical  Books 
as  well  as  definite  principles  of  church  government. 
The  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio  again  is  based  upon  the 
Symbolical  Books,  and  is  clearly  united  upon  cer- 
tain  inferences  from  them,  and  is  to  be  found   in 

(167) 


1 68        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

parts  of  the  same  territory  with  the  bodies  just 
named.  And  the  Synodical  Conference,  besides 
the  acceptance  of  the  Book  of  Concord  and  the  as- 
sertion of  what  are  called  the  "  Four  Points,"  has 
clearly  stated  its  doctrine  of  the  government  of  the 
Church,  is  bound  together  by  a  peculiar  history, 
and  is  predominantly  a  German  body.  The 
United  Synod  in  the  South  embraces:  i.  Cer- 
tain Synods  which  formerly  belonged  to  the  Gen- 
eral Synod,  but  were  separated  from  it  by  the  war, 
and  which  at  the  close  of  the  w^ar  found  the  Synods 
they  formerly  were  associated  with  divided  be- 
tween the  General  Council  and  the  General  Synod, 
while  they  themselves  had  begun  a  development  of 
their  own;  2.  Certain  Synods  formed  since  that 
separation;  and  3.  Synods  that  never  had  been  in 
tlie  General  S3mod,  but  even  from  the  first  had 
maintained  an  opposition  to  it. 

It  is  a  territorial  designation.  With  the  ex- 
ception of  a  couple  of  German  congregations  in 
Richmond,  Va.,  which  are  independent  or  belong 
to  the  Missouri  Synod,  and  a  few  in  North  Caro- 
lina or  Virginia,  which  have  broken  from  her 
Synods  and  joined  the  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio,  and 
an  independent  German  Church  in  Atlanta,  Ga., 
the  (Jjiited  Synod  in  the  South  embraces  all  the 
Lutheran  congregations  in  Virginia,  North  Caro- 
lina, Georgia,  Mississippi  and  Florida  and  those  of 
Eastern  Tennessee.  It  does  not  include  the  whole 
South,  for  there  is  a  German  Synod  in  Texas  con- 


OF  THE   UNITED   SYNOD   IN   THE   SOUTH.       169 

nected  with  the  General  Council,  and  certain  mis- 
sion posts  of  the  Missouri  Synod  in  New  Orleans 
and  along  the  Mississippi.  But  the  Georgia 
Synod  has  congregations  in  Alabama,  and  the 
Tennessee  Synod  has  missions  in  the  same  state. 

It  would  be  interesting  to  note  the  characteris- 
tics of  these  Churches.  One  familiar  with  them 
would  be  able  to  show  that  each  Synod  represents 
a  distinct  community;  but  another  would  find  a 
strong  family  likeness  between  all  the  Lutherans 
of  the  South.  At  a  meeting  of  the  United  Synod 
the  delegates  from  the  Virginia  and  Georgia 
Synods  are  not  unlike;  and  those  of  the  Synods 
which  for  a  long  time  were  separated  and  opposed 
to  each  other,  are  of  the  same  looks  and  tone. 

At  Winchester,  Woodstock,  Newmarket,  Va., 
in  the  region  of  Salisbury  and  Concord,  N.  C,  in 
Orangeburg,  Lexington,  Newberry,  Charleston,  S. 
C,  we  find  churches  of  the  first  generation  of 
Lutherans  in  America.  The  Salzburgers  of 
Effingham  Co.,  Ga.,  with  their  ancient  settle- 
ment, venerable  church  edifice,  graveyard,  com- 
munion plate,  records,  date  from  1734.  The 
Church  at  Savannah  is  later.  Salem,  Va.,  Wil- 
mington, N.  C. ,  Columbia,  S.  C. ,  Augusta,  Ga., 
and  the  Holston  Synod  of  East  Tennessee  repre- 
sent a  later  activity;  and  Roanoke,  Va.,  Rich- 
mond, Charlotte,  Knoxville  and  churches  in 
Florida,  belong  to  the  more  recent  extension  of  the 
Church. 


170        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

The  South  is  an  agri cultural  community.  So 
the  vast  majority  of  the  Lutherans  in  the  South  are 
farmers.  Their  homes  are  plain.  Their  living  is 
frugal.  They  live  far  apart.  They  handle  little 
money.  Their  congregations  are  small  and  not 
wealthy.  They  are  of  independent  mind.  And 
because  of  wide  separation  from  one  another,  they 
are  likely  to  be  as  much  moved  by  the  sentiment 
of  the  community  in  which  tliey  dwell,  as  by  the 
common  opinion  of  their  coreligionists  far  away. 
They  are  of  German  descent  and  exhibit  the  traits 
of  their  ancestors.  But  there  are  only  a  few  Ger- 
man congregations  among  them,  and  these  are  in 
cities  recruited  by  later  im.migration,  and  therefore 
not  in  complete  sympathy  with  the  descendants  of 
an  earlier  immigration,  nor  able  to  exert  upon  the 
latter  the  wholesome  influence  of  a  devotion  to  the 
traditions  of  the  German  Church.  If  their  means 
and  their  own  peculiar  vocation  be  taken  into  ac- 
count, it  will  be  found  that  the  Southern  Churches 
have  not  lagged;  though  the  progress  of  the 
Church  in  the  South  has  to  take  its  own  direction 
and  go  at  its  own  rate,  and  not  all  methods  are  ap- 
plicable here  which  elsewhere  have  proved  useful. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  detail  the  history  of  the 
plantation  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  the  South ; 
nor  to  show  how  it  was  brought  within  the  attrac- 
tions of  the  general  system  by  that  remarkable 
man  Henry  Melchior  Muhlenberg;  nor  to  recite 
the     wonderful    achievements    of    the    travelling 


OF   THE   UNITLCD   SYNOD    IN   THE   SOUTH.       171 

preachers  sent  out  by  the  :\Iother  Synod  of  Penn- 
sylvania. These  belong  to  the  common  history  of 
the  Lutherans  in  America.  But  it  is  necessary  to 
show  the  two  lines  of  development  whose  converg- 
ence has  resulted  in  the  United  Sy7iodin  the  South, 
It  is  noteworthy  that  the  progress  of  every  Luth- 
eran body  in  this  country  has  been  marked  by  an 
increasing  appreciation  of  tlie  Confessions  con- 
tained in  the  Book  of  Concord.  The  General 
Synod  (of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States  of  America,  afterwards  in 
North  America)  was  organized  at  Concord,  N.  C, 
in  1863,  by  delegates  of  the  Synods  of  Virginia, 
Southv/est  Virginia,  North  Carolina,  South  Caro- 
lina and  Georgia.  The  doctrinal  basis  then 
adopted  was: 

1.  We  receive  and  hold  that  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are 
the  Word  of  God,  and  the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  prac- 
tice. 

2.  We  likewise  hold  that  the  Apostles'  Creed,  the  Nicene 
Creed,  and  the  Augsburg  Confession,  contain  the  fundamental 
doctrines  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  and  we  receive  and  adopt 
them  as  the  exponents  of  our  faith. 

3.  Inasmuch  as  there  has  always  been,  and  still  is,  a  differ- 
ence of  construction  among  us  with  regard  to  several  articles  of 
the  Augsburg  Confession;  therefore  we,  acting  in  conformity 
with  the  spirit  and  time-honored  usage  of  our  Church,  hereby 
affirm  that  we  allow  the  full  and  free  exercise  of  private  judg- 
ment in  regard  to  those  articles. 

The  7ninntes  say  that  "the  third  section,  defin- 
ing the  doctrinal  basis  of  this  Synod,  elicited  an 


172        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

animated,  free,  yet  fraternal  discussion — each 
member  conscious  of  a  great  responsibility,  solicit- 
ous of  establishing  such  a  platform  as  would  se- 
cure the  future  unity  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in 
the  Confederate  States,  and  without  burdening 
any  one's  conscience  in  reference  to  the  doctrinal 
symbols  of  the  Church.  After  the  unanimous 
concurrence  of  the  brethren  on  the  article  by  all 
rising  to  their  feet  on  giving  their  votes,  the  ven- 
erable president,  Dr.  Bachman,  invited  the  whole 
Synod  to' unite  in  returning  thanks  to  the  Lord  for 
such  an  expression  of  harmony  on  the  most  im- 
portant part  of  the  Synod's  business." 
In  1867  the  General  Synod  resolved 

"That  we  feel  bound  as  an  ecclesiastical  body  to  withhold 
our  imprimatur  from  any  religions  publication,  of  whatever 
form,  which  shall  inculcate  principles  opposed  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  as  construed  and  defended  by  our 
Church  in  her  symbolical  writings. 

"That  we  feel  in  like  manner  bound  to  appointor  employ 
no  professor  in  our  theological  schools  who  shall  teach  doc- 
trines at  variance  with  our  time-honored  confession," 

These  resolutions  were  offered  by  a  committee 
consisting  of  Rev.  Drs.  Rude,  D.  F.  Bittle  and 
Dosh.  And  the  ''Revised  Constitution"  printed 
in  the  first  edition  of  the  Book  of  Worship  omitted 
'*  the  third  section  "  altogether. 

In  1872  the  General  Synod  adopted  a  paper 
written  by  Dr.  Dosh,  in  which  it  declared  that, 
"  It    has    placed    itself    unequivocally   upon   the 


OF  THE    UNITED   SYNOD   IN   THE   SOUTH.       1 73 

CEcumenical  Creeds  and  the  Augsburg  Confession 
in  its  true  native  and  original  sense."  "As  a  conse- 
quence the  entire  Churcli  within  its  limits  has  be- 
come more  fully  identified  in  sympathy  and  opinion 
with  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation  by  Luther 
and  his  co-workers."  The  constitution  of  the 
Theological  Seminary,  printed  with  the  INIinutes 
of  1873,  requires  the  Professors  to  acknowledge  the 
Canonical  Books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
as  the  only  Rule  of  Faith,  the  three  General 
Creeds,  as  exhibiting  the  faith  of  the  Church  uni- 
versal in  accordance  with  this  rule,  and  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  as  in  all  its  parts  in  harmony 
with  the  Rule  of  Faith  and  a  correct  exhibition  of 
the  doctrines  of  the  Word  of  God.  The  Book  of 
Worships  published  in  1868,  contained  the  doctri- 
nal Articles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  Lu- 
ther's Catechism,  and  in  the  Ordination  Service 
required  the  candidate  to  swear  fidelity  to  the  Word 
of  God  and  to  the  Confessions  of  our  Lutheran 
Church  founded  thereon;  and  its  Confirmation  Ser- 
vice asked  a  pledge  of  life-long  fidelity  to  the  Con- 
fessions of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church. 

There  has  been  a  continual  progress  in  knowl- 
edge of  these  Confessions  and  perception  of  their 
accordance  with  the  Scriptures.  They  were 
studied  for  the  most  part  in  the  Newmarket  trans- 
lation of  the  Henkels;  and  at  a  later  period  in 
Jacobs.  The  ministers  in  the  South  have  meagre 
salaries  and  cannot  buy  many  books.     As  a  conse- 


174       DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES  AND   USAGES 

quence,  they  study  those  they  have,  thoroughly. 
And  there  are  few  parsonages  in  which  will  not  be 
found  the  Book  of  Concord  and  Schmid's  Dog- 
matics, both  filled  with  markers  and  carefully  an- 
notated. One  esteemed  pastor  who  has  ministered 
to  a  venerable  community  for  forty  years,  told  me 
that  he  had  for  himself  traced  each  position  of  our 
Confessions  through  the  whole  Scriptures;  and 
after  such  study,  pursued  for  years,  had  got  com- 
plete conviction  of  the  identity  of  the  body  of  truth 
the  former  confess,  with  the  Word  of  God.  Even 
laymen  have  been  known  to  carry  the  Book  of 
Concord  with  them  to  their  work,  to  read  and 
study  in  it  at  the  nooning  or  after  work  was  done. 
The  result  of  such  faithful  investigation  was  shown 
when  the. North  Carolina  Synod,  which  for  awhile 
had  stood  by  itself,  approached  the  General  Synod 
in  1880,  "To  inquire  into  the  doctrinal  position  of 
that  body  with  a  view  to  an  organic  union  with 
it."  The  General  Synod  then  said  "of  the  Sym- 
bols adopted  subsequently  to  the  Angsburg  Confes- 
sion as  a  further  defense  of  the  truth  of  God's  in- 
fallible Word," 

"We  acknowledge  said  additional  testimonies  as  in  accord 
with  and  an  unfolding  of  the  teachings  of  the  Unaltered  Augs- 
burg Confession;  or  in  the  exact  language  of  the  Formula  of 
Concord  concerning  them,  and  the  Augsburg  Confession  as 
well,  that  they  have  not  the  authority  of  a  judge,  for  this  honor 
belongs  to  Sacred  Scriptures  alone;  but  that  they  only  bear  wit- 
ness to  our  holy  faith,  and  explain  and  exhibit  in  what  man- 
ner in  every  age  the  Holy  Scriptures  were  understood  and  set 


OF  THE   UNITED  SYNOD   IN   THE  SOUTH.       1 75 

forth  in  all  articles  contested  in  the  Church  of  God  by  teachers 
who  then  lived." 

Filially,  in  1882,  the  General  Synod  declared 
that  she  was  ready  to  co-operate  with  other  Luth- 
eran bodies  towards  organic  union  "on  an  une- 
quivocal Lutheran  basis."  She  had  thus  come,  in 
the  process  of  her  own  proper  growth,  to  an  unre- 
served and  sincere  adoption  of  all  the  Confessions  of 
the  Lutheran  Church. 

Meanwhile,  it  must  be  said  that  while  the  prac- 
tical endeavors  of  the  General  Synod  South  were 
not  fruitless,  they  brought  a  succession  of  disap- 
pointments. To  the  end  of  its  history,  it  had  not 
effected  any  great  missionary  work.  The  South 
Carolina  Synod  had  maintained  a  Theological 
Seminary  since  1832,  in  which  Dr.  Ernest  Haze- 
lius  had  been  a  teacher;  and  later,  for  a  little  while, 
Dr.  James  A.  Brown;  and  with  which  at  different 
times  Revs.  L.  Eichelberger,  Dr.  A.  R.  Rude  and 
Dr.  J.  P.  Smeltzer  were  connected;  and  from  which 
came  out  many  useful  and  devoted  men,  to  whose 
fitness  and  industry  are  due  the  preservation  and 
extension  of  the  Churches  in  the  southernmost 
states.  In  1872  this  Seminary  (having  been  trans- 
ferred to  the  General  Synod  in  1867),  was  removed 
to  Salem,  Va.,  and  Rev.  S.  A.  Repass,  D.  D.,  was 
elected  South  Carolina  Professor.  A  second  pro- 
fessor (Rev.  T.  W.  Dosh.  D.  D.,)  was  not  added 
until  1878.  The  Synods  did  not  seem  hearty  in 
their  support  of  the  Seminary,  and,  though  a  good 


176        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES  ' 

many  recognized  the  service  it  was  doing,  it  was 
summarily  closed  by  a  majority  of  one  vote  by  the 
General  Synod  at  Charleston  in  1884,  and  the  re- 
signation of  the  professors  was  accepted.  The 
South  Carolina  Synod  thereupon  reopened  the 
Theological  Seminary  in  connection  with  New- 
berry College. 

A  Church  paper  had  been  begun  with  the  new 
organization  and  after  many  vicissitudes  survives 
in  the  L^iiheraii  Visitoj^^  which,  though  of  no  little 
use  in  holding  the  Synods  to  common  work,  is 
now  in  private  hands.  The  project  of  a  Publica- 
tion Society,  although  often  revived,  has  fallen 
through. 

It  always  has  been  difficult  to  consolidate  the 
union  of  the  Southern  synods  and  to  concentrate 
their  energies.  They  are  far  apart,  and  separated 
by  long  stretches  of  country  in  which  are  none  of 
our  faith;  each  Synod  is  weak,  and  each  has  much 
to  do  on  its  own  territory;  local  prejudice  is  strong; 
there  does  not  seem  to  be  money  enough  for  the 
administrative  expenses  of  central  boards  and  gen- 
eral secretaries;  and  the  circulation  of  newspapers 
and  appeals  for  aid  published  by  the  General 
Synod  North  and  the  General  Council,  the  visits 
of  Northern  Secretaries,  and  the  division  of  senti- 
ment caused  by  the  incoming  of  ministers  trained 
in  the  rival  schools  of  the  North,  while  it  never 
has  availed  to  destroy  the  conviction  that  the 
Lutheran    Church    in    the   South   has   a   peculiar 


OF   THE    UNITED   SYNOD   IN    THE   SOUTH.       1 77 

cliaracter  and  a  duty  of  her  own,  has  distracted  the 
attention  of  our  people  from  their  own  work,  made 
them  discontented  witli  their  own  small  perform- 
ance, and  threatened  to  introduce  divisions  and 
quarrels  with  which  we  ought  to  have  nothing  at 
all  to  do. 

The  abiding  work  of  the  General  Synod  South 
is  the  Book  of  Worship,  of  which  we  will  speak 
hereafter. 

But  the  United  Syjwd  of  the  South  embraces 
more  than  the  former  "General  Synod  in  North 
America."  Besides  these  are  the  Tennessee  and 
Holston  Synods;  the  latter  an  offshoot  of  the 
former,  organized  in  1861.  At  its  very  organiza- 
tion in  1820  the  Tennessee  Synod  adopted  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  Luther's  Small  Cate- 
chism as  its  doctrinal  basis,  and  was  distinguished 
by  its  bold  and  intelligent  defense  of  the  dis- 
tinctive doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  This 
was  at  a  time  when  other  Lutheran  bodies  in 
America  had  declined  from  the  Confessions  of  the 
fathers.  In  1866,  in  its  revised  constitution,  this 
confessional  statement  was  enlarged  to  include  all 
the  confessions  of  the  Book  of  Concord: 

"  It  receives  also  the  other  Symbolical  Books  of  the  Evangeli- 
.cal  Lutheran  Church,  viz.,  the  Apology,  the  Snialcald  Articles, 
the  Smaller  and  Larger  Catechisms  of  Luther,  and  the  Form- 
ula of  Concord — as  true  Scriptural  developments  of  the  doc- 
trines taught  in  the  Augsburg  Confession. 

This  Synod  was  peculiarly  active  in  the  transla- 
12 


178        DISTIXCTIVK   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

tion  and  dissemination  of  these  confessional  writ- 
ings. The  Henkels  of  Newmarket,  Va.,  published 
the  Angsbnrg  Confession  and  the  Catechism  in 
English  and  German;  a  translation  of  the  whole 
Book  of  Concord  in  1851;  a  revision  of  the  same  in 
1854;  and  a  translation  of  Luther's  Sermons  on  the 
Epistles  in  1869.  The  ministers  of  the  Tennessee 
Synod,  trained  as  they  have  been  for  the  most  part 
in  the  homes  and  companionship  of  older  minis- 
ters, have  not  a  wide  and  varied  culture,  but  pos- 
sess a  profound  acquaintance  with  the  writings  of 
Luther  and  a  ready  and  genial  knowledge  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures. 

At  the  beginning  of  its  history  the  Tennessee 
Synod  set  itself  against  the  organization  of  the  (old) 
General  Synod.  Among  the  most  prominent  ad- 
vocates of  that  movement,  was  a  member  of  the 
North  Carolina  Synod  wdio  was  a  minister  in  the 
Moravian  Church,  and  at  that  time  the  same  Synod 
ordained  a  minister  for  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Chnrch.  It  will  not  be  denied  that  at  the  time  of 
the  organization  of  the  General  Synod,  the  import- 
ance of  sound  doctrine  was  not  recognized,  and  the 
Lutheran  Confessions  were  not  known  and  studied 
as  they  should  have  been.  It  may  not  be  known 
that  while  the  advocates  of  closer  association 
dreamed  of  an  eventnal  organization  of  all  the 
Christians  in  the  United  States,  their  original  pro- 
ject for  a  General  Synod  proposed  to  recognize  the 
ordination  of  no  Lutheran  minister  without  its  ex- 


OF   THE   UNITED   SYNOD   IN   THE   SOUTH.       1 79 

press  sanction.  The  Tennessee  Synod  therefore 
opposed  it  as  a  sanctnary  of  lax  doctrine  and  spirit- 
ual tyranny.  The  champions  of  opposing  views 
became  involved  in  further  controversy,  in  misun- 
derstanding, in  encroachments  upon  each  otlier; 
until  Lutheran  Synods  occupying  the  same  terri- 
tory began  to  look  upon  each  other  as  the  worst 
enemies,  i^s  a  result,  the  Tennesseans  held  aloof 
from  all  the  general  movements  which  at  an  earlier 
period  have  done  so  much  good,  such  as  the  Amer- 
ican Sunday-school  Union,  the  Bible  Society,  etc., 
and  fell  into  the  danger  of  disregarding  even  the 
good  objects  of  these  organizations,  because  of  ob- 
jectionable principles  allowed  by  them.  For  a 
wdiile  the  strength  of  the  Tennessee  Synod  was 
given  to  the  maintenance  of  Orthodoxy;  nor  are  we 
able  to  deny  that  their  championship  was  needed 
and  has  been  effectual.  But  a  reaction  set  in. 
The  true  faith  began  to  glow  with  loving  sympathy 
with  brethren  at  work  for  the  Lord;  it  became  dis- 
satisfied and  threatened  to  languish  in  isolation 
and  inactivity.  So,  at  the  same  time,  the  other 
Synods  of  the  South  reached  the  conviction  of  the 
substantial  solidarity  of  all  the  Lutheran  Confes- 
sions, and  owning  these  as  their  own  convictions  of 
the  truth,  saw  that  the  Tennesseeans  were  their 
brethren;  the  Tennesseeans  recognized  their  ortho- 
doxy in  turn,  and  were  desirous  to  help  in  those 
works  which  heretofore  these  had  essayed  in  vain. 
In  1883  propositions  were  laid  before  the  Synods 


l8o        DISTINCTIVE    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

composing  the  General  Syno'.l  looking  to  a  new 
union  which  should  embrace  the  Tennessee  and 
Holston  Synods  also.  The  Virginia  Synod  took 
the  lead  in  approving  this,  and  laid  down  a  course 
for  itself  which  the  other  synods  adopted.  The 
General  Synod  at  Charleston,  in  1884,  resolved  to 
take  up  the  matter  and  appointed  commissioners  to 
represent  each  Synod  in  a  Diet  or  Free  Conference 
with  the  representatives  of  the  two  Synods.  The 
General  Synod  was  careful  to  assert  its  own  devo- 
tion to  the  Lutheran  confessions  and  the  soundness 
of  its  past  history,  but  professed  itself  willing  to 
make  any  right  sacrifices  for  the  sake  of  ultimate 
union.  This  action  of  the  General  Synod  was  ap- 
proved by  all  the  Synods  except  that  of  Georgia, 
but  its  delegate  also  was  present  at  the  meeting  of 
a  Diet  at  Salisbury,  N.  C,  November  12,  13,  1884, 
though  he  protested  that  he  came  only  as  a  Com- 
missioner of  the  General  Synod.  A  "Basis  of 
Union,"  said  to  have  been  substantially  the  work 
of  Rev.  Socrates  Henkel,  D.  D.,  approved  by  Rev. 
J.  Hawkins,  D.  D.,  was  considered  in  committee, 
amended,  and  ultimately  adopted.  The  "Confes- 
sional Basis"  as  finally  adopted  is  that  of  the 
Tennessee  Synod,  and  reads  as  follows: 

'  The  Doctrinal  Basis  of  this  organization  shall  be, 
"  I.  The  Holy  Scriptures,  the  Inspired  writings  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  the  only  standard  of  doctrine  and  Church  dis- 
cipline. 

**  2.  As  a  true  and  faithful  exhibition  of  the  doctrines  of  the 


OF   THE   UNITED   SYNOD   IN    THE   SOUTH.       l8l 

Holy  Scriptures  iu  regard  to  matters  of  faith  and  practice,  the 
three  Ancient  vSynibols,  the  Apostolic,  the  Nicene  and  the 
Athanasiau  Creeds,  and  the  Unaltered  Augsburg  Confession  of 
Faith;  also,  the  other  Symbolical  Books  of  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church,  viz.:  The  Apology,  the  Smalculd  Articles, 
the  Smaller  and  Larger  Catechisms  of  Luther,  and  the  Formula 
of  Concord,  consisting  of  the  Epitome  and  Full  Declaration,  as 
they  are  set  forth,  deiined  and  published  in  the  Christian  Book 
of  Concord,  or  the  Symbolical  Books  of  the  Lutheran  Church, 
published  in  the  year  1580  (see  the  Epitome,  of  the  CompeJid- 
ious  Rule  atid  Standard,  and  the  Solida  Declaratio,  Preface], 
as  true  and  Scriptural  developments  of  the  doctrines  taught  in 
the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  in  the  perfect  harmony  of  one 
and  the  same  pure,  Scriptural  faith." 

The  first  draft  presented  to  the  Diet  was  rejected, 
because  it  did  not  preserve  the  singular  pre-emin- 
ence of  the  Augsburg  Confession;  and  that  the 
manner  of  the  acceptance  of  these  Confessions  may 
not  be  misunderstood,  references  to  their  own  de- 
clarations are  added  with  a  final  explanatory  clause 
derived  from  the  **Fundam.ental  Principles"  of  the 
General  Council.  The  substance  of  the  declara- 
tions referred  to  may  be  given  in  the  following 
paragraphs : 

"The  distinction  betveeen  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments  and  all  other  writings  is  preserved,  and 
the  Holy  Scriptures  alone  remain  the  only  judge,  rule  and 
standard,  according  to  which,  as  the  only  touchstone,  all  dog- 
mas must  be  discerned  and  judged,  as  to  whether  they  be  good 
or  evil,  right  or  wrong. 

"  "We  have  only  meant  that  we  have  a  unanimously-received, 
definite,  common  form  of  doctrine,  v;hich  our  Evangelical 
Churches,  together  and  in  common,  confess;  from  and  accord- 


1 82        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

ing  to  which,  because  it  has  been  derived  from  God's  word,  all 
other  writings  should  be  judged  and  adjusted  as  to  how  far 
they  are  to  be  approved  and  accepted." 

Thus  the  Confessions  of  our  Church  again 
proved  to  be  a  Christian  Book  of  Concord. 

A  constitution  was  yet  to  be  adopted,  if  a  real 
organic  union  was  to  be  made.  The  same  com- 
mittee  was  appointed  to  report  a  constitution,  and 
before  it  a  complete  draft  was  laid.  This,  besides 
other  provisions  which  the  delegates  might  not  be 
prepared  to  adopt,  contained  a  distinct  enactment 
of  what  have  been  called  in  our  Church  "the  Four 
Points,"  viz.,  the  prohibition  of  Pulpit  and  Altar 
Fellowship  with  those  wdio  are  not  of  our  Church, 
of  Membership  in  Secret  Societies,  and  of  "Chili- 
asm."  This  draft  was  laid  aside;  and  as  the 
Basis  of  Union  already  adopted  seemed  to  present 
the  whole  compass  of  the  consent  of  all  the 
Synods,  and  also  expressly  limited  the  functions 
of  the  general  body  to  be  "only  of  an  advisory 
and  recommendatory  character  in  all  matters,  ex- 
cept such  as  pertain  to  the  general  interests  or 
operations  of  the  Church  ;"  the  Basis  itself  was 
made  the  outline  of  a  Constitution,  wdiose  omis- 
sions were  filled  up  from  the  old  Constitution  of 
the  General  Synod.  This  was  adopted  with  but 
three  votes  of  dissent,  as  I  remember  it ;  two  de- 
claring their  agreement  with  the  President  of  the 
meeting,  Rev.  P.  C.  Henkel,  D.  D.,  "who  ap- 
proved   the    Constitution    so  far  as    it   goes ;    but 


OF   THE   UNITED   SYNOD   IN   THE   SOUTH.       1 83 
declined  to  vote  for  it  because  it  is  silent  in  regard 

o 

to  Pulpit  and  Altar  Fellowship,  Secret  Societies 
and  Cliiliasni."  Dr.  Polycarp  Henkel  has  since 
been  called  out  of  the  strife  of  tongues  into  the 
peace  of  God. 

In  June,  1886,  the  General  Synod  held  its  last 
session,  at  Roanoke,  Va.,  and  at  the  same  time  a 
Diet  assembled.  The  General  Synod  formally 
closed  up  its  affairs;  the  Diet  heard  the  favorable 
reports  of  the  Synods  on  the  Basis  and  Constitu- 
tion adopted  at  Salisbury;  and  the  United  Synod 
in  the  South  was  organized;  the  General  Synod 
formally  merging  itself  into  it  and  transferring  to 
it  all  its  possessions,  works  and  undertakings;  a 
trust  which  the  United  Synod  as  formerly  accepted. 

Thus  the  18,000  Lutherans  who  formally  had 
been  a  General  Synod,  and  the  14,000  of  the  Hol- 
ston  and  Tennessee  Synods,  struck  hands  and  be- 
gan to  work  together  to  fulfil  a  common  duty. 
There  is  little  difference  between  them.  And  yet, 
having  been  long  apart,  and  having  inherited  dis- 
trust and  hostility,  and  having  for  a  long  time 
supported  and  been  recruited •  by  separate  teachers 
and  schools,  it  could  not  be  expected  that  questions 
should  not  rise  to  disturb  this  consummation. 

It  can  be  said  of  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the  South- 
ern Synods  that  it  is  the  sincere  and  intelligent 
Confession  of  the  Churches.  By  this  I  do  not 
mean  that  the  Lutheran  Churches  in  the  South 
have  pondered  all  the  controversies  in  which  the 


1 84        DISTINCTIVR    DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

Syuibois  originated  and  to  which  they  gave  the 
answer;  nor  that  they  have  accepted  all  the  infer- 
ences which  sincere  Lutherans  now  draw  from  the 
Confessions  and  even  may  be  justified  in  urging. 
But  it  is  true  that  no  teacher  is  acceptable  among 
lis  who  rejects  any  of  these  Confessions,  or  of  whose 
sincere  belief  of  them  and  thorough  knowledge  of 
them  v/e  have  any  doubt.  The  Holy  Scriptures 
are  our  only  rule  of  faith,  and  we  know  no  better 
guide  into  their  sense  than  these  Confessions  afford, 
and  we  perceive  their  exact  accordance  with  the 
rule  of  faith,  and  as  we  study  them  we  rejoice  in 
the  consciousness  of  the  entire  conformity  of  our 
faith  with  that  of  the  fathers  and  confessors  of  our 
Church.  In  controversy  it  is  usual  to  appeal  to 
them;  and  all  our  teachers  regard  their  word  as 
final  in  decision  of  what  is  Lutheran  doctrine  and 
Lutheran  practice.  It  has  been  thought  by  some 
tliat  to  subscribe  Articles  of  Faith,  to  be  sworn 
upon  the  Confessions  of  the  Church  as  our  candi- 
dates for  ordination  are,  might  limit  freedom  of  in- 
vestigation and  lav  a  burden  on  conscience;  but  it 
is  not  too  much  to  hold  that  the  Southern  Churches 
as  a  whole  receive  the  Symbolical  Books,  and  es- 
pecially the  Augsburg  Confession  and  the  Small 
Catechism,  with  which  they  are  most  familiar,  be- 
cause they  believe  them;  and  they  believe  them 
because  they  set  forth  the  Word  of  God.  The  time 
may  indeed  come — though  may  God  in  His  mercy 
forbid   it — when  our  Churches  shall  decline  from 


OF  THE   UNITED  SYNOD   IN   THE   SOUTH.       185 

this  f^iitli;  but  rather  do  we  hope  and  pray  that  all 
our  brethren  may  come  to  this  assurance  of  faith, 
and  be  of  one  mind  with  us  and  with  one  another. 
Before  we  proceed  to  the  later  and  not  untroubled 
history  of  the  United  Synod,  it  will  be  interesting 
to  note  what  the  General  Synod  turned  over  to  the 
new  body.  First,  was  an  organized  Boated  of  Alts- 
swns  and  Church  Exteitsio7t,  which  at  tliat  time 
was  receiving  and  disbursing  money  for  a  Foreign 
Mission  in  connection  with  that  of  the  General 
Synod  North,  at  Guntur  in  India.  This  mission 
came  to  an  end  because  of  the  unexpected  resigna- 
tion of  the  missionary.  In  1888  it  was  resolved  to 
attempt  a  mission  in  Japan.  The  first  missionary 
sailed  in  February,  1892,  and  another  in  the  fol- 
lowing autumn.  The  Board  has  been  more  sue-, 
cessful  in  Home  Missions.  The  income  has  grad- 
ually increased;  a  Secretary  is  employed,  who  has 
general  supervision;  a  monthly  devoted  to  Mission 
News  is  published  at  Augusta,  Ga.,  under  his 
direction;  the  church  at  Augusta,  Ga.,  (materially 
helped  by  the  South  Carolina  Synod);  a  church  at 
Knoxville,  Tenn.,  with  other  missions  in  East 
Tennessee,  with  the  churches  at  Richmond,  Va., 
and  another  at  Winston,  N.  C,  receive  its  care. 
In  this  work  the  Board  has  been  upheld  by  the 
Women's  Missionary  Societies  Each  Synod  has 
its  own  Synodical  Women's  Society,  and  they 
cooperate  under  the  direction  of  the  Board.  Be- 
sides this  general  work,  the  Church  Extension  So- 


I66       DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES  AND   USAGES 

ciety  and  Women's  Society  of  the  S.  W.  Va. 
Synod,  and  also  the  Church  Extension  Society  of 
the  Virginia  Synod,  have  done  prompt  and  success- 
ful work  in  the  new  manufacturing  towns  in  their 
own  states.  In  1883  a  Service  and  Hymns  for  Siin- 
day-scJiools  was  published,  which  maintains  a  very 
high  standard  of  sacred  poetry  and  sacred  music, 
and  essays  to  teach  the  children  the  requisites  of 
the  service  of  the  Church.  Of  this,  nearly  3,000 
copies  have  been  sold.  The  General  Synod  also 
transferred  the  copyright  of  the  Book  of  IVorship 
and  the  manuscript  of  the  Common  Service^  which 
the  United  Synod  at  its  first  convention  adopted 
and  ordered  to  be  published  as  soon  as  possible. 

One  of  the  first  acts  of  the  General  Synod  of  the 
•South  on  its  organization  had  been  the  compilation 
and  publication  of  a  Book  of  Worship  for  its 
churches,  which  at  that  time  was  the  completest 
book  of  the  sort  in  the  English  language  for  Luth- 
eran congregations.  It  contained  no  distinct  Eve- 
ning Service;  the  Morning  Service  and  the  Com- 
munion Office  were  modeled  on  that  presented  in  a 
Provisional  Service  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod; 
and  it  was  affected  by  some  peculiarities  of  the 
Danish  Liturgy.  It  did  not  contain  the  Collects  ; 
and  had  only  ten  Introits  for  the  Sundays;  but  for 
each  of  the  Great  Festivals  had  a  special  Introit 
and  a  Festival  Prayer.  The  service  began  with 
an  Introit;  the  Confession  of  Sins  followed;  and  af- 
ter it  was  the  Kyrie.     The  Ten  Commandments 


OF  THE   UNITED   SYNOD   IN   THE   SOUTH.       1 87 

might  be  substituted  for  the  Creed.  The  book 
contained  the  Litany,  the  Tc  Dcumd.w(\  the  Passion 
History.  After  the  Hymns  a  series  of  prayers  for 
private  and  family  devotions  was  given,  from  the 
"old  New  York  Hymn  Book."  The  Doctrinal 
Articles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  Luther's 
Small  Catechism,  together  with  the  three  CEcu- 
nienical  Creeds,  were  printed  in  a  separate  part. 
Before  the  Passion  History,  the  Penitential  Psalms 
were  given.  The  Book  contains  also  a  complete 
series  of  Orders  for  Ministerial  Acts,  which  for  the 
most  part  are  based  on  those  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Synod. 

This  book  found  immediate  acceptance  among 
the  more  intelligent  members  of  the  Southern 
churches.  By  the  time  of  the  union  at  Roanoke, 
at  least  10,000  copies  w^ere  in  use.  No  Synod  or 
Conference  sanctioned  any  other  order  of  worship. 
The  Book  of  Worship  secured  substantial  uniform- 
ity in  the  use  of  a  dignified  and  historical  liturgy 
in  nearly  all  the  churches  of  the  General  SyriOd. 

Meanwhile,  the  General  Synod  was  engaged  in 
a  continual  effort  to  amend  and  improve  the  book. 
Every  successive  edition  showed  the  removal  of 
typographical  errors  and  the  improvement  of 
rubrical  directions.  In  1876  committees  were  ap- 
pointed to  revise  the  various  parts  of  the  book  ; 
and  at  that  meeting  the  Committee  was  instructed 
"to  confer  with  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  General 
Synod  in  the  United   States  and  the  Evangelical 


1 88        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

lyUtheran  General  Council  in  America  with  regard 
to  the  feasibility  of  adopting  but  one  book,  con- 
taining the  same  hymns  and  the  same  order  of  ser- 
vices and  liturgic  forms,  to  be  used  in  the  public 
worship  of  God  in  all  the  English-speaking  Evan- 
gelical Lutheran  Churches  in  the  United  States." 
This  was  the  beginning  of  the  movement  to  secure 
a  Common  Service.  It  had  been  suggested  in 
1870,  in  a  letter  from  the  venerable  Dr.  Bachman 
to  the  General  Synod,  but  the  time  was  not  then 
ripe.  The  matter  was  brought  up  again  in  1878, 
and  steps  were  taken  to  urge  the  Northern  bodies 
to  a  definite  reply.  At  the  same  meeting;  the  Com- 
mittee was  enlarged  and  the  object  of  the  contin- 
uous amendment  of  the  Service  was  declared  to  be 
*'the  ultimate  attainment  of  the  distinctively 
Lutheran  cultus,  breathing  the  spirit  of  our 
Evangelical  faith,  and  which  is  a  legitimate  out- 
growth therefrom,  and  at  the  same  time  is  in  full 
accord  with  the  service  of  the  Primitive  Church." 
In  1882  the  General  Synod  referred  to  this  Com- 
mittee many  proposed  changes,  and  in  1884 
adopted  a  long  series  of  them  ;  so  that,  if  the  Com- 
mon Service  had  not  finally  been  adopted,  the 
Southern  Book  of  Worship,  in  its  new  edition, 
would  have  contained  the  Introits  and  Collects  for 
the  Church  Year,  the  prescription  of  the  Epistles 
and  Gospels,  of  the  Nicene  Creed  and  of  the 
Proper  Prefaces  in  the  Communion  Service.  The 
determination  was  asserted  "to  prosecute  the  re- 


OF  THE   UNITED  SYNOD   IN   THE  SOUTH.       1 89 

vision  of  the  Book  of  Worship  in  honest  fidelity  to 
the  spirit  and  history  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  in 
order  that,  at  all  events,  we  may  possess  a  ritual 
as  nearly  correct  as  it  can  be  made."  In  1886  the 
Protocol  of  the  Joint  Committee  outlining  the 
Comvwn  Service  was  presented  and  approved. 

The  accession  of  the  Tennessee  and  Hclston 
Synods  did  not  take  from  the  liturgical  spirit  and 
zeal  of  the  Southern  churches.  Before,  they  had 
used  in  m,nny  of  their  churclics  the  Church  Book^ 
published  by  tlie  General  Council  in  1868;  based, 
like  the  Book  of  Worship,  on  the  Provisional 
Service  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod,  and  represent- 
ing a  liturgical  progress  which  culminated  in  the 
Common  Service.  Accordingly  the  outline  of 
the  Common  Service  was  adopted  by  the  United 
Synod  immediately  on  its  organization,  and  in 
1888,  the  complete  MS.  was  laid  before  it  and  ap- 
proved. 

On  the  publication  of  the  Common  Service  in 
1888,  it  met  with  an  immediate  welcome  in  all  the 
Southern  Synods.  The  principles  which  underlay 
it  and  the  successive  stages  in  its  preparation  had 
been  laid  before  the  Church  and  pondered  by  it. 
It  was  introduced  into  all  the  leading  churches, 
and  its  use  is  enjoined  by  some  Synods.  It  gives 
order  to  our  worship,  secures  uniformity  among  us, 
provides  a  system  of  devotion  in  harmony  with  our 
faith,  maintains  among  us  tlie  fundamental  doc- 
trines of  God's  Word  and  an  administration  of  the 


190        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

sacraments  according  to  tlie  Gospel,  and  stores  in 
the  minds  of  our  children  the  form  of  sound  words; 
and  while  we  rejoice  in  our  accord  with  the  fathers 
of  our  own  church  and  with  the  Church  of  all  ages 
in  the  use  of  these  venerable  forms,  the  Southern 
Church  has  hoped  to  fulfill  her  own  special  voca- 
tion in  uniting  in  this  the  churches  of  the  Gen- 
eral Synod  and  those  of  the  General  Council  with 
her  own.  This  hope  seems  destined  to  fulfillment; 
and  already  the  English  churches  of  the  Synod  of 
Missouri  and  of  the  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio  are  adopt- 
ing this  Common  Service  of  the  Lutheran  Church. 
But  though  the  adoption  of  a  common  service 
of  worship  was  thus  attained,  new  questions  arose, 
which  have  threatened  the  union  which  seemed  so 
necessary  to  the  advancement  of  our  Church  in  the 
South.  When  the  Salisbury  Basts  of  Union  was 
reported  to  the  Tennessee  Synod  it  was  adopted, 
but  the  following  was  added: 

"In  adopting  this,  as  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Tennessee 
Synod  rejects  all  ecclesiastical  union  and  co-operation  which  is 
not  based  on  the  pure  Lutheran  teaching  and  faith;  as  the  Ex- 
change of  Pulpits,  Promiscuous  Communion  or  Altar  Fellow- 
ship, Secret  Society  Worship  and  Chiliasm,  we,  the  ministers 
and  lay-delegates,  in  Synod  assembled,  do  hereby  recommend 
or  advise  the  Committee,  or  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee,  ap- 
pointed by  the  United  Synod  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  in  the  South  to  prepare  by-laws  for  its  government,  in 
drafting  such  by-laws,  so  to  formulate  them  as  to  require  every 
teather  or  professor  who  may  be  appointed  as  a  teacher  or  pro- 
fessor in  any  Theological  Seminary  she  may  establish  or  put 
into  operation,  to  take  an  obligation  not  to  teach,  practice  or 


OF  THE   UNITED  SYNOD   IN   THE   SOUTH.       I91 

inculcate  anylliing  that  comes  in  conflict  \vith  these  principles, 
or  the  doctrines  of  the  Church." 

Accordingly,  in  1887  at  Savannah,  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Socrates  Henkel  reported  the  following  by-law, 
which  was  printed  in  the  Minutes  and  laid  over 
until  the  next  meeting,  at  which  it  was  again 
postponed: 

"  FA'ery  minister,  teacher,  professor,  or  missionary,  in  any  in- 
stitution or  enterprise  under  the  supervision  or  control  of  this 
United  Synod,  before  entering  on  the  performance  of  tlie 
duties  of  his  office,  shall  make  an  affirmation  that  he 
will  inculcate  nothing  that  is  in  conflict  with  the  Doctrinal 
Basis  of  this  United  Synod  as  defined  in  its  Constitution,  but 
that  all  his  religious  teachings  shall  be  in  conformity  with  the 
same;  and  that  he  will  not  foster  nor  encourage  intercommun- 
ion or  altar-fellowship  with  non-Lutherans,  or  unionistic  ser- 
vices, or  any  secret  society  of  a  doubtful  or  deistic  character." 

The  introduction  of  this  question  has  caused 
great  unrest.  On  the  one  hand  the  Tennessee 
Synod  in  1888  repeated  the  resolutions  of  1886  and 
threatened  to  withhold  its  cooperation  until  the 
by-law  is  adopted.  It  holds  that  it  is  not  its  inten- 
tion to  force  its  position  on  the  other  Synods,  but 
simply  to  protect  itself.  It  cannot  conscientiously 
assist  in  any  general  undertaking  which  docs  not 
acknowledge  these  principles.  On  the  other  hand, 
some  have  interpreted  these  "four  points"  as  an 
attempt  to  commit  the  whole  United  Synod  to 
what  is  called  "Close  Communion"  and  complete 
separation  from  all  other  Christian  people,  and  this 
is  held  to  be  a  denial   that  Christians  not  of  the 


192        DISTINCTIVE   DOCTRINES   AND   USAGES 

Lutheran  Faith  are  of  the  Christian  Church  and 
within  the  pale  of  salvation.  The  North  Carolina 
Synod  has  made  its  cooperation  to  depend  on  the 
excision  of  the  last  clause  of  the  by-law.  No 
doubt,  the  question  has  been  shifted,  and  many  are 
put  into  a  serious  dilemma;  for  while  they  disap- 
prove of  "promiscuous  communion,"  and  ex- 
change of  pulpits,  and  of  "secret  societies  of  a 
doubtful  or  deistic  character,"  they  are  far  from 
unchurchino;  those  of  more  or  less  divercrent  faith. 
The  questions  involved  have  never  been  fully  dis- 
cussed, and  the  churches  in  the  South  are  not  pre- 
pared to  set  forth  their  final  answer;  and  therefore 
either  an  adoption  or  a  summary  rejection  of  this 
By-law  cannot  but  prove  a  serious  disaster  to  all 
of  them. 

Accordingly,  at  Knoxville,  in  1892,  the  United 
Synod  declared  its  persuasion  that  it  was  not  able 
to  express  a  unanimous  judgment  on  these  regula- 
tions, and  simply  adopted  the  By-laws  without  the 
proposed  regulations  relative  to  the  common  work 
of  the  Synods.  The  purport  of  this  action  is  to 
leave  the  question  undecided,  and  to  recognize  the 
difference  of  opinion  which  exists. 

The  efficiency,  and  perhaps  the  continued  exist- 
ence of  the  United  Synod,  seems  to  depend  on  the 
establishment  of  a  central  Theological  Seminary, 
which,  in  expounding  the  doctrines  of  the  Church, 
may  not  be  too  greatly  moved  by  the  questions 
which  agitate  the  General   Bodies  in   the  North. 


OF   THE    UNITED   SYNOD    IN   THE   vSOUTH.       193 

The  Constitution  of  a  Theolo(2:ical  Seminary  has 
been  adopted  (1892);  its  Board  of  Directors  has  been 
organized;  the  Seminary  at  Newberry  has  been 
recognized  as  the  Seminary  of  the  United  Synod; 
and  Rev.  A.  C.  Voigt  has  been  elected  professor  of 
Theology. 

The  means  of  the  Southern  Churches  are  strained 
to  the  utmost  to  take  possession  of  every  point  of 
vantage  in  their  rapidly  developing  territory.  But 
it  is  to  be  hoped  that  nothing  may  interrupt  this 
union  of  all  the  Lutherans  of  this  section  in  one 
Confession  of  faith  and  one  mode  of  worship. 

13 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01144  8612 


